R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Poll

Total Members Voted: 0


Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 13   Go Down

Author Topic: Who was more important?  (Read 20080 times)

telefunky

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8
Re: Who was more important?
« Reply #30 on: December 21, 2005, 09:53:24 pm »

Curve Dominant wrote: I noticed you never use bands like Duran Duran or Depeche Mode or New Order as your examples. Out of all the mainstream 80's pop bands
You are obviously not old enough to remember the 80's if you are under the impression that Depeche Mode and New Order were "mainstream 80's pop bands".  They were played on only a few stations in even fewer cities, and the kids in school that liked those kinds of bands were very much on the cutting edge.  I think this is a general misunderstanding of 80's music that is prevalent in 20 somethings today.  Mainstream in the 80's was Phil Collins, Madonna, Michael Jackson, Prince, Asia, Men at Work, Huey Lewis, J. Geils, etc.
Logged

Alex Maiolo

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1
Re: Who was more important?
« Reply #31 on: December 21, 2005, 11:57:59 pm »

I'd give it to the Minutemen, and not just because I like them more.

The Minutemen were one of the greatest influences on Indie, Do It Yourself, whatever you want to call it, culture. They launched a thousand bands because people believed That Band Could Be Their Life.

The repercussions went far beyond the actual bands they spawned. An entire indie culture formed and the idea of recording lost a lot of it's mystery. "If Spot can do it, why can't I?"
You mentioned yourself that "vibe" was the key with them, warts and all. So, if you recorded your best friend's band on an X-15, drunk on the ad you saw in Guitar Player that reminded you that Sgt. Pepper was done the same way (you know...kind of...) it probably was the result of the Econo mindset. A record didn't have to sound like Tony Visconti did it to be deemd "good" anymore, at least by some of us. That didn't happen with the Sex Pistols, with their Svengali and his ideas of a proper anti-image. The Ramones recorded in "real" NYC studios, because that's what you did back then. What Makes a Man Start Fires? could have been recorded in any room, on any width tape, on any machine, with any mics and it would have been just as good as the one we know, as long as the people who made it (everyone) loved what they were doing.

Wang Chung was just a point long the curve, if you'll pardon the pun. I assume they used the best gear the day had to offer, studio time cost was irrelevant and they were geniuses in the eyes of the coke fueled engineers. Same with the flavors of the years before them (Pablo Cruise) and after (uh...Warrant?). The same could be said for Tears for Fears, Thompson Twins and a whole host of others from that time. There will always be some sort of Wang Chung in any given year. Even if the band's a turd, it can be polished.
The Minutemen were part of a true movement that has yet to be repeated.
The last grassroots "movement" that came along was Alt. Country/No Depression, and it didn't really live up to it's promise, did it?

The age old test:
Strum out "Everybody Have Fun Tonight" on your acoustic. How does it sound without the double tracks, reverb, horn section, etc.?
Now do the same with the simple "Bob Dylan Wrote Propaganda Songs."
Go ahead...I'll wait.
Which one makes you want to go out and form a band *right now*?
That's what I thought.

I would wager that the few who decided they wanted to do music for a living after hearing Wang Chung gave it up and moved on to a "normal" life eventually.
The majority of the Minutemen people probably still buy records, see shows or do something musical on a regular basis.

It's tough to talk about the Minutemen right now without sounding biased. The new movie is out an nostalgia is high. Last week I was asked to play at it's local premiere, along with 7 other bands, and I decided we'd do techno/electroclash versions of the songs just to show how strong they are in any style. it worked surprisingly well. I doubt you could do alt. versions of Wang Chung songs with the same success.

Wang Chung were good at what they did and I hope they are living comfortably in a country house somewhere. However, if you're asking me if I Want New Wave Or The Truth, I'm going with the latter because I've built my life around it.




Logged

Tidewater

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3816
Re: Who was more important?
« Reply #32 on: December 22, 2005, 12:00:22 am »

Wang Chung. Were you guys not there?

Music I've never heard is not influencing me, not even a little bit.

M
Logged
Time Magazine's 2007 Man of the Year

jimmyjazz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1885
Re: Who was more important?
« Reply #33 on: December 22, 2005, 12:06:50 am »

Of course,the hip answer is the Minutemen.  I was a legitimate fan of both artists, though, and without a trace of contrarianism, I'd have to go with Wang Chung.  I think their brand of synth-pop was significantly more well-conceived than that of most of their peers, and as such, they showed that what was largely a genre devoid of any soul could hit some high notes.
Logged

kraster

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 199
Re: Who was more important?
« Reply #34 on: December 22, 2005, 12:13:28 am »

Alex Maiolo wrote on Thu, 22 December 2005 04:57



Wang Chung were good at what they did and I hope they are living comfortably in a country house somewhere. However, if you're asking me if I Want New Wave Or The Truth, I'm going with the latter because I've built my life around it.







Not so fast :

"In June 2005, Hues and Feldman reunited as Wang Chung on the hit reality TV series Hit Me Baby One More Time performing "Everybody Have Fun Tonight" and a cover of "Hot in Herre" by Nelly

Shortly after, and on the net at WangChung.com as well as Myspace.com/WangChungTheBand ... there was news of a new Wang Chung album being worked on by Jack Hues and Nick Feldman. In an e-mail response from Jack Hues, he said, "We are shooting for a release around the March [2006] timeframe and a tour in May. We are not sure who we are touring with yet, maybe Heaven 17 or Devo." ... Also on MySpace.com/WangChungTheBand you can hear new clips such as "Hot In Herre" (The Nelly Cover) and a new song "I Was Abducted By The 80's".


http://www.wangchung.com/images/indexfrontpage/wangchung.gif



The horror continues....
Logged

TheViking

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 276
Re: Who was more important?
« Reply #35 on: December 22, 2005, 01:35:41 am »

Let's go back to the whole definition of 'important'.   Ultimately, it could be argued that neither are important because honestly, there are better things to listen to overall.   This question is loaded.   Personally, if I'm contemplating a selection to listen to in any situation, you're not going to find me reaching for a record by either of these artists.

This question makes me want to watch High Fidelity.

"If I were to say to you 'I haven't seen Evil Dead 2 yet?' would you think I didn't want to see it, or would you think I really did want to see it?"
Logged
Is this thing on?

Kevin Bruchert / The Viking
www.myspace.com/thevikingproducer

carne_de_res

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 85
Re: Who was more important?
« Reply #36 on: December 22, 2005, 03:34:43 pm »

i'd say the Minutemen resulted more important in the end.

if them and a handful of other bands hadn't mercilessly toured every corner of the USA and made such brilliant records the underground scene wouldn't have developed at all.

the Minutemen, Sonic Youth , Big Black, Beat Happening and other great indipendent bands (and their labels) helped build the underground scene and paved the way for the so-called "grunge" breakout in the 90's (Nirvana, Pixies, Breeders et al.).

the Minutemen, she's such a great band. she's more important than that faghina Wang Chung.
Logged
"will record for food"

hillbilly

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 37
Re: Who was more important?
« Reply #37 on: December 22, 2005, 04:59:41 pm »

I really liked Wang Chung. Good '80's hooks and production.

"Live And Die In L.A." soundtrack was cool too.
Logged

zboy2854

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 121
Re: Who was more important?
« Reply #38 on: December 23, 2005, 09:10:02 am »

The question is a form of Rorshach test, everyone sees something different in the answer.

As for me, the answer is blue.
Logged

pipelineaudio

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 379
Re: Who was more important?
« Reply #39 on: December 23, 2005, 05:21:54 pm »

carne_de_res wrote on Thu, 22 December 2005 20:34

i'd say the Minutemen resulted more important in the end.

if them and a handful of other bands hadn't mercilessly toured every corner of the USA and made such brilliant records the underground scene wouldn't have developed at all.

the Minutemen, Sonic Youth , Big Black, Beat Happening and other great indipendent bands (and their labels) helped build the underground scene and paved the way for the so-called "grunge" breakout in the 90's (Nirvana, Pixies, Breeders et al.).

the Minutemen, she's such a great band. she's more important than that faghina Wang Chung.


You know, if you replaced "minutemen" with Circle Jerks and "sonic youth" with The Mentors I would agree with you, but the minutemen?

who?

Statick

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13
Re: Who was more important?
« Reply #40 on: December 24, 2005, 11:14:10 am »

my vote goes for the underground, always. there is always much more interesting work going on with lesser known acts.

i'm lucky in that where i live in the UK (near bristol) has one of the most vibrant underground music scenes in the world at the moment. keep an ear out guys, you'll be hearing a lot from this city in the coming few years...
Logged

Ronny

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2739
Re: Who was more important?
« Reply #41 on: December 24, 2005, 11:59:19 am »

Statick wrote on Sat, 24 December 2005 11:14

my vote goes for the underground, always. there is always much more interesting work going on with lesser known acts.

i'm lucky in that where i live in the UK (near bristol) has one of the most vibrant underground music scenes in the world at the moment. keep an ear out guys, you'll be hearing a lot from this city in the coming few years...



I don't doubt that for one bit. I'm not really into techno music, but Jammer from Bristol is doing some great stuff. I recently bought a live cd, only one song on it that's about 60 minutes long and it holds my total interest from the first note played to the last.
Logged
------Ronny Morris - Digitak Mastering------
---------http://digitakmastering.com---------
----------Powered By Experience-------------
-------------Driven To Perfection---------------

Gone

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 431
Re: Who was more important?
« Reply #42 on: December 24, 2005, 03:46:52 pm »

The easiest way to answer the question is to not try to directly compare the two...

Wang Chung had a number of hits, but were obviously a 'singles' band, with no major albums to speak of. I believe their albums proper are out of print (in the US, anyway), available as greatest hits packages only. I don't recall ever hearing their contemporaries or bands in similar genres that came after referring to them as an influence. They will go down in music video history first and foremost for their seizure-inducing video (and for making what's generally considered a horrible mistake - using the band name within a song). I would say the majority of people who like new wave have a LONG, LONG list of artists who come before Wang Chung. They might rank just above 'Taco'.

The Minutemen's "Double Nickels" is considered (depending on who you talk to) a minor or major classic in the genre. It, and most if not all their other work, is still in print and widely available. I have read and spoken to many bands who list them as an influence (even those who play much different music), or something they listened to heavily in their formative years. Their music will be passed down through the generations of punk/hardcore/alternative/indie listeners, (like Minor Threat, Husker Du, etc). and continue to be important and influential to a relatively small crowd.
Logged

Larrchild

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3972
Re: Who was more important?
« Reply #43 on: December 24, 2005, 04:16:08 pm »

As Saturday Night Live used to say:
"Quines mas Macho?  A. Robert Stack  B. Lloyd Bridges

Everyone knows it's B.

I'm gonna say that for the .1% of people on earth who have heard of both, Minutemen changed your thinking more, and are therefore, more important.
Logged
Larry Janus
http://2ubes.net

rnicklaus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3859
Re: Who was more important?
« Reply #44 on: December 24, 2005, 05:54:45 pm »

When you claim Minutemen records are "widely available" where is that?

It is much easier to go out and find 20th Century Masters on Wang Chung (not that I would want to) than a Minutemen album.

Wang Chung had one record go Gold, "Mosaic".  

They had a hit with Dance Hall Days in '84,  and their biggest hit, Everybody Have Fun Tonight in '86.

In the middle they did the film track To Live and Die In LA which was all over MTV.

Minutemen?  No doubt more credible.
Logged
R.N.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 13   Go Up