I was thinking about some of the albums that I own that have come out in the past few years, all of which saw at least moderate commercial success, and noticed that 80s influence is all over them. In fact, most reviews mention the direct influence. What's weird is that some of these acts have only recently become 80s like. Is it time for an 80s resurgence? I sumbit for review:
The Killers - Day & Age
Yeah Yeah Yeahs - It's Blitz!
La Roux - La Roux
Tegan & Sara - Sainthood
Lady Gaga - The Fame & The Fame Monster (although the latter might have some 70s pull)
Even Ms. Britney Spears, as of late. Now I'm dragging on but I guess what I'm spotting is the reemergence of mainstream electropop.
Uh welcome to 2004 hello!
Quote from: katmai on November 28, 2009, 12:03:38 AM
Uh welcome to 2004 hello!
QuoteTop 10 selling albums of the year in the US in 2004
1. Confessions / Usher ~ 7,978,594
2. Under My Skin / Avril Lavigne ~ 6,970,000
3. In The Zone / Britney Spears~ 4,535,102
4. Encore / Eminem ~ 3,917,097
5. Feels like Home / Norah Jones ~ 3,842,920
6. Autobiography / Ashlee Simpson ~ 3,534,912
7. When the Sun Goes Down / Kenny Chesney ~ 3,072,224
8. Here for the Party / Gretchen Wilson ~ 2,931,097
9. Live Like You Were Dying / Tim McGraw ~ 2,786,840
10. Songs About Jane / Maroon 5 ~ 2,708,415
:unsure:
QuoteIn the "Sound of 2009" poll of 130 music experts conducted for the BBC 10 of the top 15 artists named were of the electro-pop genre.
Quote from: garbon on November 27, 2009, 11:54:32 PM
I sumbit for review:
The Killers - Day & Age
Yeah Yeah Yeahs - It's Blitz!
La Roux - La Roux
Tegan & Sara - Sainthood
Lady Gaga - The Fame & The Fame Monster (although the latter might have some 70s pull)
Even Ms. Britney Spears, as of late. Now I'm dragging on but I guess what I'm spotting is the reemergence of mainstream electropop.
None of these sound like Poison, Cinderella or Warrant. So no.
Kip Winger says you're heading for a failbreak.
Quote from: garbon on November 28, 2009, 12:06:47 AM
QuoteIn the "Sound of 2009" poll of 130 music experts conducted for the BBC 10 of the top 15 artists named were of the electro-pop genre.
When has there NOT been electro-pop?
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 28, 2009, 12:07:26 AM
None of these sound like Poison, Cinderella or Warrant. So no.
Kip Winger says you're heading for a failbreak.
I meant the good part of 80s music.
What I meant garbon was I started hearing your same sentiments back in 2004 with debuts of the killers, Fran Ferdinand, and records by interpol, rapture and others
Understandable, although I think the Killers now are much more like the 80s than at their debut. Franz Ferdinand? Really? :unsure:
Garbon is talking about electropop while Kat is talking about new wave. :huh:
Quote from: citizen k on November 28, 2009, 12:32:35 AM
Garbon is talking about electropop while Kat is talking about new wave. :huh:
I thought the point from what is being called post punk revival of the bands I listed to the electropop garbon is just to show that the trend of 80's music resurgance has been going on in one way for the last 5 years.
Chromeo :contract:
Quote from: citizen k on November 28, 2009, 12:32:35 AM
Garbon is talking about electropop while Kat is talking about new wave. :huh:
Electropop grew out of New Wave and post-punk. Similarly the stuff Garbo's going on about developed out of the trend Kat's talking about.
Booyah vindicated by the sheilbh.
Umm, that would put us in the early 80's then. ^_^
Quote from: garbon on November 28, 2009, 12:05:43 AM
Quote from: katmai on November 28, 2009, 12:03:38 AM
Uh welcome to 2004 hello!
QuoteTop 10 selling albums of the year in the US in 2004
1. Confessions / Usher ~ 7,978,594
2. Under My Skin / Avril Lavigne ~ 6,970,000
3. In The Zone / Britney Spears~ 4,535,102
4. Encore / Eminem ~ 3,917,097
5. Feels like Home / Norah Jones ~ 3,842,920
6. Autobiography / Ashlee Simpson ~ 3,534,912
7. When the Sun Goes Down / Kenny Chesney ~ 3,072,224
8. Here for the Party / Gretchen Wilson ~ 2,931,097
9. Live Like You Were Dying / Tim McGraw ~ 2,786,840
10. Songs About Jane / Maroon 5 ~ 2,708,415
:unsure:
I can't believe any list with Usher at the top closely followed by Avril Lavigne worthy of any positive note.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 28, 2009, 12:07:26 AM
None of these sound like Poison, Cinderella or Warrant. So no.
Kip Winger says you're heading for a failbreak.
Winger are in town on 8th December. I considered going, but it's in a hall notorious for its bad sound system. Maybe Nazareth next year. Definitely Slayer next year.
La Roux is the only of those albums I know about.
And yeah it really is uber 80s.
Its weird really; the beginning of the 2000s had bands taking influence from the early 80s, post punk revival stuff. Now there's a lot of full mid 80s, crappy pop new wave stuff.
Quote from: Syt on November 28, 2009, 03:36:26 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 28, 2009, 12:07:26 AM
None of these sound like Poison, Cinderella or Warrant. So no.
Kip Winger says you're heading for a failbreak.
Winger are in town on 8th December. I considered going, but it's in a hall notorious for its bad sound system. Maybe Nazareth next year. Definitely Slayer next year.
All you need is for Molly Hatchet to roll into town.
Quote from: Tyr on November 28, 2009, 08:30:25 AM
Its weird really; the beginning of the 2000s had bands taking influence from the early 80s, post punk revival stuff. Now there's a lot of full mid 80s, crappy pop new wave stuff.
New wave and post-punk are much of a muchness. I think you mean new romanticism - which was, broadly speaking, wank.
Having said that I do love a good pop song.
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 28, 2009, 08:45:18 AM
All you need is for Molly Hatchet to roll into town.
I wished. :(
we get W.A.S.P., Europe and Pennywise in the next couple months, though. I missed Kim Wilde. -_-
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 28, 2009, 08:55:59 AM
Quote from: Tyr on November 28, 2009, 08:30:25 AM
Its weird really; the beginning of the 2000s had bands taking influence from the early 80s, post punk revival stuff. Now there's a lot of full mid 80s, crappy pop new wave stuff.
New wave and post-punk are much of a muchness. I think you mean new romanticism - which was, broadly speaking, wank.
Having said that I do love a good pop song.
Nah, post-punk I'd identify more as the earlier stuff. Mainly guitar based. Joy Division and the like. New Wave is once the machines start taking over, largely New Romantic but not exclusivly so, New Order were one of the few good New Wave examples.
Anyway.
Having said what I said I hope this means we'll get new Britpop in 10 years or so....but then 10 years after that it'll be bands pretending to be bands pretending to be bands from the 80s?
Rock is still dead. :(
80s music sucked. Trust me. i was there.
Quote from: Tyr on November 28, 2009, 09:01:56 AM
Nah, post-punk I'd identify more as the earlier stuff. Mainly guitar based. Joy Division and the like. New Wave is once the machines start taking over, largely New Romantic but not exclusivly so, New Order were one of the few good New Wave examples.
You just make up your own definitions for stuff, don't you?
Quote from: PDH on November 28, 2009, 11:13:30 AM
Quote from: Tyr on November 28, 2009, 09:01:56 AM
Nah, post-punk I'd identify more as the earlier stuff. Mainly guitar based. Joy Division and the like. New Wave is once the machines start taking over, largely New Romantic but not exclusivly so, New Order were one of the few good New Wave examples.
You just make up your own definitions for stuff, don't you?
No, its the general definition.
Exacrtly where the line between the two starts is vague and left entirely up to people to decide for themselves but post punk is generally taken to be late 70s-early 80s whilst new wave is early-mid 80s.
Its a bit confused because even punk was called new wave at the time but the modern definition is squarely a 80s electronicish one.
Quote from: Tyr on November 28, 2009, 11:18:19 AM
No, its the general definition.
Exacrtly where the line between the two starts is vague and left entirely up to people to decide for themselves but post punk is generally taken to be late 70s-early 80s whilst new wave is early-mid 80s.
Its a bit confused because even punk was called new wave at the time but the modern definition is squarely a 80s electronicish one.
By "general definition" you mean what you believe regardless of the facts.
Punk and New Wave coexisted from the mid 70s, they were different names for the genre that was splitting immediately after the Ramones and Sex Pistols kicked things off on different sides of the Atlantic (remember, mid-1970s). The interest in new musical forms prompted producers to label a brand of this music "New Wave" in order to have it sell better, but in reality it DID begin as part of the Punk Scene.
Electronic was part of this New Wave from the start. Devo, a punk band, introduced synthesizer elements even before they got a record deal (again, mid-70s), and were thus New Wave. I understand this is confusing you you, because you seem to associate New Wave with the later commercial aspect that come about purely in the first half of the 1980s, but (and this is important) you don't know everything.
Your "Post-Punk" "New Wave" dichotomy seems to be driven by misunderstanding of the facts (I expect you have misread the advert-TISS-ments), and buying into later thoughts about the movement. The Commercial New Wave you refer to as the "modern definition" seems to be one designed by younger folks who do not remember, and who wish some sort of clear division between the golden age and the later times. There is none.
Again, you just make things up and present them as gospel. It seems to be your thing.
Quote from: PDH on November 28, 2009, 12:27:15 PM
By "general definition" you mean what you believe regardless of the facts.
Punk and New Wave coexisted from the mid 70s, they were different names for the genre that was splitting immediately after the Ramones and Sex Pistols kicked things off on different sides of the Atlantic (remember, mid-1970s). The interest in new musical forms prompted producers to label a brand of this music "New Wave" in order to have it sell better, but in reality it DID begin as part of the Punk Scene.
Electronic was part of this New Wave from the start. Devo, a punk band, introduced synthesizer elements even before they got a record deal (again, mid-70s), and were thus New Wave. I understand this is confusing you you, because you seem to associate New Wave with the later commercial aspect that come about purely in the first half of the 1980s, but (and this is important) you don't know everything.
Your "Post-Punk" "New Wave" dichotomy seems to be driven by misunderstanding of the facts (I expect you have misread the advert-TISS-ments), and buying into later thoughts about the movement. The Commercial New Wave you refer to as the "modern definition" seems to be one designed by younger folks who do not remember, and who wish some sort of clear division between the golden age and the later times. There is none.
Again, you just make things up and present them as gospel. It seems to be your thing.
Don't be retarded.
As I said the lines are vague and at the time the term new wave was thrown about to refer to lots of things (even the Sex Pistols).
According to the modern definition though you're obviously a complete idiot if you call the Sex Pistols New Wave. Likewise to call Spandau Ballet post-punk is just utterly wrong.
Meanings of words change over time.
Did you read what I wrote? No? Good, that explains your response. Punk-New Wave split almost immediately after the initial punk splash because of percieved problems in marketing punk, not because of genre differences.
The New Wave you are referring to is a later self-referential definition, a larger commercial one that is different from what you wish to be saying. New Wave follows Punk timeline quite closely, and dies shortly after the "1st Wave" Punk dies too. The Romantic, Dance, Electronica, etc movements that are born out of both Punk and New Wave are not either - they are evolutions of this.
I know definitions change over time - applying new definitions to something that is not applicable is still wrong, however.
And to be clear. New Wave AND Punk started in New York, and were copied in Great Britain. So the movements you speak of are derivative anyway.
(cue MB and USA! USA! :) )
Quote from: PDH on November 28, 2009, 12:55:05 PM
And to be clear. New Wave AND Punk started in New York, and were copied in Great Britain. So the movements you speak of are derivative anyway.
(cue MB and USA! USA! :) )
USA! USA!
And I hate punk. And the English. :P
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 28, 2009, 01:15:10 PM
And I hate punk. And the English. :P
Punk was a lot cooler when I was 16 :)
Quote from: PDH on November 28, 2009, 12:55:05 PM
And to be clear. New Wave AND Punk started in New York, and were copied in Great Britain. So the movements you speak of are derivative anyway.
(cue MB and USA! USA! :) )
UM and LA :contract:
same time more rockabilly influenced, and also a big reaction against Hippies and stadium rock.
but yeah. as far as the so-called "post punk" definitely a self referential phrase used (my own timeline may be different but I see post-punk as anything vaguely punk/new wave that was recorded after the Clash disintegrated on Combat Rock.) by those tired of being pigeonholed as punk new wave or whatever, it's even vaguer and thus more useful.
PDH on Jos. That's a new combo.
It's great watching Tyr go on, absolutely convinced that he knows better about things that happened before he was born, compared to someone who was there.
QuoteDid you read what I wrote? No? Good, that explains your response. Punk-New Wave split almost immediately after the initial punk splash because of percieved problems in marketing punk, not because of genre differences.
The New Wave you are referring to is a later self-referential definition, a larger commercial one that is different from what you wish to be saying. New Wave follows Punk timeline quite closely, and dies shortly after the "1st Wave" Punk dies too. The Romantic, Dance, Electronica, etc movements that are born out of both Punk and New Wave are not either - they are evolutions of this.
I know definitions change over time - applying new definitions to something that is not applicable is still wrong, however.
Did you read what I wrote? No? That explains your response. :rolleyes:
As I said the term new wave was applied to punk bands freely, the terms punk and new wave were mixed and matched at will. New wave meant just that, the new wave of music.
It came to be however in the 80s that new wave actually stuck with a particular genre, whatever was called new wave before that is irrelevant. By modern definitions New Wave= pretty poppy stuff that had its peak popularity in the mid 80s.
Terms change. Much as how emo is now shitty pop-punk rather than hardcore punk so too punk is not new wave.
QuoteAnd to be clear. New Wave AND Punk started in New York, and were copied in Great Britain. So the movements you speak of are derivative anyway.
Not really.
Much of the groundwork for the punk sound came from the US however this was all just proto-punk and garage rock.
Quote from: Neil on November 28, 2009, 02:11:58 PM
It's great watching Tyr go on, absolutely convinced that he knows better about things that happened before he was born, compared to someone who was there.
I'm British. Therefore I'm entitled to say that we're a federal republic ruled by a chancellor and you can't argue with me on account of being foreign. Hurray.
Quote from: Tyr on November 28, 2009, 02:30:00 PM
I'm British. Therefore I'm entitled to say that we're a federal republic ruled by a chancellor and you can't argue with me on account of being foreign. Hurray.
Not every British person is completely ignorant in regards to music history.
Quote from: garbon on November 28, 2009, 02:09:40 PM
PDH on Jos. That's a new combo.
I think just about everybody here has had to take Jos to task at some point or other.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 28, 2009, 02:45:33 PM
I think just about everybody here has had to take Jos to task at some point or other.
That's fair. Really the sheer level of idiocy on his part is almost incomprehensible. It's like he's a forever know-it-all teen.
candy vs. sweets, take 2.
Quote from: Jaron on November 28, 2009, 04:34:34 PM
candy vs. sweets, take 2.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thelifestream.net%2Fforums%2Fimages%2Fsmilies%2Ffacepalm2.jpg&hash=bb07e35305f5ec5f9eb7794dd01052c14e168cb0)
WTF :blink:
QuoteThat's fair. Really the sheer level of idiocy on his part is almost incomprehensible. It's like he's a forever know-it-all teen.
Except, you know, what I'm saying here is perfectly valid. :rolleyes:
Quotecandy vs. sweets, take 2.
That was other people being dense. Not me.
QuoteNot every British person is completely ignorant in regards to music history.
And not every older person is completely well versed in it purely on account of being old enough to be 'there'.
Quote from: Tyr on November 28, 2009, 05:31:48 PM
And not every older person is completely well versed in it purely on account of being old enough to be 'there'.
True. But in this case, we're talking about someone who is intimately connected with the music scene and the history of music.
Quote from: Tyr on November 28, 2009, 05:31:48 PM
That was other people being dense. Not me.
When all of these instances have one person in common, you have to wonder if the problem is really the other people.
Anyway, perhaps that is how you use the term New Wave but ignorance doesn't make it that the correct usage. If that was the case, "your stupid" and "its a boy" would be accurate statements.
Btw, I think my thoughts on new wave were once similar to yours, however then I read a bit and learned I was mistaken.
Quote from: Tyr on November 28, 2009, 02:30:00 PM
Not really.
Much of the groundwork for the punk sound came from the US however this was all just proto-punk and garage rock.
I pick this out because it is so wrong. Read up on the Ramones and Television. They were not proto-punk or garage rock. Especially, Television's style influenced Malcolm McLaren immensly. The "groundwork" from the US was the first punk bands, the first punk style, and the first punk records. English punk politicized that country's brand, but it was not the first.
Again, you seem to be reading liner notes from some 1990s music critic who was not around at the time. I barely caught the last bit of the first wave, but I am smart enough to read the history of what I am arguing about.
Sorry Garbs, I know this has little to do with the commercial New Wave of the 80s, but sometimes I see things so wrong I have to argue.
I'm just a guy who likes to get drunk
I'm just a guy who likes to dress punk
Get my kicks and live my life
:)
Quote from: PDH on November 28, 2009, 06:13:27 PM
Sorry Garbs, I know this has little to do with the commercial New Wave of the 80s, but sometimes I see things so wrong I have to argue.
No worries.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdummidumbwit.files.wordpress.com%2F2009%2F08%2Fhuman-league.jpg&hash=3658ccf2b2ad163d2f6e7479ca2b019c4d043826)
Quote from: Tyr on November 28, 2009, 12:36:57 PM
According to the modern definition though you're obviously a complete idiot if you call the Sex Pistols New Wave. Likewise to call Spandau Ballet post-punk is just utterly wrong.
But Spandau Ballet weren't new wave either.
Quote from: PDH on November 28, 2009, 12:55:05 PM
And to be clear. New Wave AND Punk started in New York, and were copied in Great Britain. So the movements you speak of are derivative anyway.
Punk did. New York had no wave so it doesn't count.
QuoteIt came to be however in the 80s that new wave actually stuck with a particular genre, whatever was called new wave before that is irrelevant. By modern definitions New Wave= pretty poppy stuff that had its peak popularity in the mid 80s.
I'd disagree. Many of the new wave/post-punk bands such as Human League, Scritti Politti and so on achieved later popularity in the mid-80s, but they all started late 70s as post-punk/new wave. They also all influenced bands like Spandau Ballet or Duran Duran, but I think they're broadly separate.
QuotePunk did. New York had no wave so it doesn't count.
:lol:
This is the cleverest post I've read in a long, long time.
Or a silly mistake. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Wave) Heck, they even had the Del-Byzanteens. They are probably the closest you get in the mid-70s to the roots of 90's Alternative and modern Indie music, especially cause of Sonic Youth and Mission of Burma.
New York :wub:
So Garbon, you're still preoccupied with 1985?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VgDh3_snQHE
Can anyone escape their year of birth? :unsure:
Quote from: garbon on November 29, 2009, 05:38:46 AM
Can anyone escape their year of birth? :unsure:
Most people do, by living a year.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on November 29, 2009, 07:34:15 AM
Quote from: garbon on November 29, 2009, 05:38:46 AM
Can anyone escape their year of birth? :unsure:
Most people do, by living a year.
Some people do it even quicker. It only took me three weeks.
This whole 80s-revival thing is so a la mode right now. So at our staff Christmas party we decided on having an 80s theme. And then reminding all the 20-30 year olds how bad it actually was by dividing the party venue in half with a wall, herding everyone into the crap part, feeding them only vodka and bread, and then firing them when the wall is knocked down and privatisation is implemented.
Quote from: Tyr on November 28, 2009, 02:30:00 PMI'm British. Therefore I'm entitled to say that we're a federal republic ruled by a chancellor and you can't argue with me on account of being foreign. Hurray.
That smarmy, snooty, effeminate I'm-British-ergo-smarter-than-you-because-I-sound-like-it-AND-I-use-ergo can only carry you so far.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 29, 2009, 09:25:27 AM
That smarmy, snooty, effeminate I'm-British-ergo-smarter-than-you-because-I-sound-like-it-AND-I-use-ergo can only carry you so far.
Hey, it's got me this far :p
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 29, 2009, 09:44:44 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 29, 2009, 09:25:27 AM
That smarmy, snooty, effeminate I'm-British-ergo-smarter-than-you-because-I-sound-like-it-AND-I-use-ergo can only carry you so far.
Hey, it's got me this far :p
You can pull it off. Josq, not so much.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 29, 2009, 09:25:27 AM
Quote from: Tyr on November 28, 2009, 02:30:00 PMI'm British. Therefore I'm entitled to say that we're a federal republic ruled by a chancellor and you can't argue with me on account of being foreign. Hurray.
That smarmy, snooty, effeminate I'm-British-ergo-smarter-than-you-because-I-sound-like-it-AND-I-use-ergo can only carry you so far.
:rolleyes:
You are here. The point is at Alpha Centauri.
To say 'French is a Germanic language. You can't argue with me. I have a degree in linguistics whilst you don't' is just wrong.
QuoteWhen all of these instances have one person in common, you have to wonder if the problem is really the other people.
All these instances? That was one minor instance which some people got oddly worked up about.
QuoteI pick this out because it is so wrong. Read up on the Ramones and Television. They were not proto-punk or garage rock. Especially, Television's style influenced Malcolm McLaren immensly. The "groundwork" from the US was the first punk bands, the first punk style, and the first punk records. English punk politicized that country's brand, but it was not the first.
Again, you seem to be reading liner notes from some 1990s music critic who was not around at the time. I barely caught the last bit of the first wave, but I am smart enough to read the history of what I am arguing about.
:rolleyes: Jesus christoff. Please stop the stupid accusations that I haven't read about this stuff. I'm basing this entirely off what I've read.
I'm not at all familiar with television but the Ramones, though very important and influential for punk (along with Iggy, New York Dolls and the like), certainly aren't true punk themselves. Just look at the famous first album cover, in style they're utterly un-punk.
And again: I've recognised from the start that 'New Wave' was around in the 70s, my entire point is that the modern definition of New Wave is rather different to how people in the 70s would have defined it.
Ok, so you assert the Ramones aren't punk.
You fail.
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 29, 2009, 09:45:40 AM
You can pull it off. Josq, not so much.
I think Sheilbh's a toff.
Quote from: Tyr on November 29, 2009, 10:11:45 AM
I'm not at all familiar with television but the Ramones, though very important and influential for punk (along with Iggy, New York Dolls and the like), certainly aren't true punk themselves. Just look at the famous first album cover, in style they're utterly un-punk.
That begs the question what is punk? Is it a style of music, an attitude or a fashion brand created by McLaren and Westwood?
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 29, 2009, 11:49:15 AM
...or a fashion brand created by McLaren and Westwood?
Taken from Richard Hell.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 28, 2009, 12:07:26 AM
Quote from: garbon on November 27, 2009, 11:54:32 PM
I sumbit for review:
The Killers - Day & Age
Yeah Yeah Yeahs - It's Blitz!
La Roux - La Roux
Tegan & Sara - Sainthood
Lady Gaga - The Fame & The Fame Monster (although the latter might have some 70s pull)
Even Ms. Britney Spears, as of late. Now I'm dragging on but I guess what I'm spotting is the reemergence of mainstream electropop.
None of these sound like Poison, Cinderella or Warrant. So no.
Kip Winger says you're heading for a failbreak.
:x
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on November 30, 2009, 05:03:28 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 28, 2009, 12:07:26 AM
Quote from: garbon on November 27, 2009, 11:54:32 PM
I sumbit for review:
The Killers - Day & Age
Yeah Yeah Yeahs - It's Blitz!
La Roux - La Roux
Tegan & Sara - Sainthood
Lady Gaga - The Fame & The Fame Monster (although the latter might have some 70s pull)
Even Ms. Britney Spears, as of late. Now I'm dragging on but I guess what I'm spotting is the reemergence of mainstream electropop.
None of these sound like Poison, Cinderella or Warrant. So no.
Kip Winger says you're heading for a failbreak.
:x
Hey, my senior year song was friggin' Whitesnake, man. Hurl.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 30, 2009, 07:14:25 AM
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on November 30, 2009, 05:03:28 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 28, 2009, 12:07:26 AM
Quote from: garbon on November 27, 2009, 11:54:32 PM
I sumbit for review:
The Killers - Day & Age
Yeah Yeah Yeahs - It's Blitz!
La Roux - La Roux
Tegan & Sara - Sainthood
Lady Gaga - The Fame & The Fame Monster (although the latter might have some 70s pull)
Even Ms. Britney Spears, as of late. Now I'm dragging on but I guess what I'm spotting is the reemergence of mainstream electropop.
None of these sound like Poison, Cinderella or Warrant. So no.
Kip Winger says you're heading for a failbreak.
:x
Hey, my senior year song was friggin' Whitesnake, man. Hurl.
Well, that's always better...
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 29, 2009, 11:49:15 AM
That begs the question what is punk? Is it a style of music, an attitude or a fashion brand created by McLaren and Westwood?
Good question. I looked up punk on wiki, and it says the first recorded use of the term is by a cofounder of The Fugs. Don't know anything about them. Did they have the style but not the fashion?
To the OP, the 80's were great. It had it all. At the beginning we all thought we were going to die in a nuclear winter and by the end communism was dealt a death blow.
The music was wide ranging and diverse and a lot of the music reflected the turbulent times we lived in.
I know I will sound like a grumpy old man but music today is pretty generic and sanitized.
Quote from: crazy canuck on November 30, 2009, 12:24:17 PM
To the OP, the 80's were great. It had it all. At the beginning we all thought we were going to die in a nuclear winter and by the end communism was dealt a death blow.
The music was wide ranging and diverse and a lot of the music reflected the turbulent times we lived in.
I know I will sound like a grumpy old man but music today is pretty generic and sanitized.
So not really a response to me at all, then? :D
Quote from: garbon on November 30, 2009, 12:34:54 PM
So not really a response to me at all, then? :D
You need to read between the lines.
This generation sucks so of course they look to a better time. A golden age of music if you will.
Quote from: crazy canuck on November 30, 2009, 01:26:58 PM
You need to read between the lines.
This generation sucks so of course they look to a better time. A golden age of music if you will.
Or you could just say that. :tinfoil:
I took your statement to mean that we aren't really copying anything as we don't have the ability to.
Quote from: garbon on November 30, 2009, 02:09:49 PM
I took your statement to mean that we aren't really copying anything as we don't have the ability to.
Copying appears to be the only thing that this generation of musicians can do.
Quote from: crazy canuck on November 30, 2009, 02:53:04 PM
Quote from: garbon on November 30, 2009, 02:09:49 PM
I took your statement to mean that we aren't really copying anything as we don't have the ability to.
Copying appears to be the only thing that this any generation of musicians can do.
Quote from: crazy canuck on November 30, 2009, 02:53:04 PM
Quote from: garbon on November 30, 2009, 02:09:49 PM
I took your statement to mean that we aren't really copying anything as we don't have the ability to.
Copying appears to be the only thing that this generation of musicians can do.
Unlike the paragons of originality I listened to in the '70s, like Led Zep. They would *never* copy others. :D
Quote from: Malthus on November 30, 2009, 03:02:09 PM
Unlike the paragons of originality I listened to in the '70s, like Led Zep. They would *never* copy others. :D
We are talking about the 80s here. Not the terrible decade devoid of music known as the 70s.
Quote from: crazy canuck on November 30, 2009, 03:03:23 PM
Quote from: Malthus on November 30, 2009, 03:02:09 PM
Unlike the paragons of originality I listened to in the '70s, like Led Zep. They would *never* copy others. :D
We are talking about the 80s here. Not the terrible decade devoid of music known as the 70s.
Ahh, the 80s. When Duran Duran ruled the airwaves. ;)
Quote from: crazy canuck on November 30, 2009, 03:03:23 PM
Quote from: Malthus on November 30, 2009, 03:02:09 PM
Unlike the paragons of originality I listened to in the '70s, like Led Zep. They would *never* copy others. :D
We are talking about the 80s here. Not the terrible decade devoid of music known as the 70s.
90s > 70s > 60s > 80s >>>>>>> 2000s
I like Supertramp.
Quote from: Malthus on November 30, 2009, 03:15:15 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on November 30, 2009, 03:03:23 PM
Quote from: Malthus on November 30, 2009, 03:02:09 PM
Unlike the paragons of originality I listened to in the '70s, like Led Zep. They would *never* copy others. :D
We are talking about the 80s here. Not the terrible decade devoid of music known as the 70s.
Ahh, the 80s. When Duran Duran ruled the airwaves. ;)
The reflex...gag reflex that is. :x
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 30, 2009, 05:35:33 PM
90s > 70s > 60s > 80s >>>>>>> 2000s
People are tired of the sound and expect a change, but I think some of it will age well. TV on the Radio, for instance. The Black Keys, earlier White Stripes.
That said, fuck all the pussy non-electric indie bands. All of 'em.
Quote
I'm not at all familiar with television but the Ramones, though very important and influential for punk (along with Iggy, New York Dolls and the like), certainly aren't true punk themselves. Just look at the famous first album cover, in style they're utterly un-punk.
And again: I've recognised from the start that 'New Wave' was around in the 70s, my entire point is that the modern definition of New Wave is rather different to how people in the 70s would have defined it.
?
this is revisionism. It's like Viper arguing that Zeppelin wasn't metal. But if you went back in time, you'd find that people then called them ... metal.
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 30, 2009, 05:53:13 PM
I like Supertramp.
Mostly a 70s act, although their biggest selling album was in 81. If you ever get a chance to see Roger Hodgson live, do so. He's pretty good.