Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[groucho]

Quote:

The Beatles were as innovative and influential as they were popular.

No doubt. I didn't mean to suggest that the two are always mutually exclusive. The Beatles are kind of the ultimate example of that.

And just to clarify: as far as I can tell, we've not been talking thusfar about "innovative", we've been talking about "influential", which is not exactly the same thing.

We can probably save the "who invented punk rock" thing for another thread. That's always a fun one.

Chris

[e.maynard]

The great thing about the Sex Pistols is/was that they quickly became predictable at working the "cash from chaos" angle. It worked then, and at the very least, it has many folks here analyzing it now.

They had no choice but to act as if the didn't care about an award........it would show a sign of maturity. That's not too good for business, regardless of the fact that the award is idiotic at best.

Never Mind the Bullocks, influenced a lot of people, myself included. It opened my ears to some great stuff like The Clash, Devo, Black Flag, Dead Kennedys, Minutemen, X, Talking Heads, (Early) Butthole Surfers etc.........

Really..... Show me an example of a legitimate, original music culture since that era.


"Punk is whatever we made it to be"
D. Boon

[Paul Cavins]

Here's a question-- Which is the better rock band, the Sex Pistols or the Clash? I think the Clash are a far greater band, although the Pistols are the punk-rock standard bearers.

I'm jamming to the Carpenters as I write this-

PC

[kraster]

groucho wrote on Sun, 12 March 2006 02:25

Ronny wrote Punk music is more underground, no big record sales, no big influence and mostly made up of musicians that could sniff glue better than they could play guitar. Ronny wrote I never said that they weren't influential, to not see that they weren't influential is ignorant even at my age and perspective, as all high profile bands have influence. Not influential... then influential. Underground... then high-profile... Consistency really isn't your thing is it, dude?

I think you're taking Ronny's comments unfairly out of context, Imho. Punk was an underground movement that was not famous for its marketing budgets, record sales or profile. The Sex Pistols changed all that (I'm talking in a UK/Europe context). McClaren exploited the burgeoning cultural movement in the UK and engineered the Sex Pistols' international notoreity through a series of High Profile publicity stunts.

The Sex Pistols were the exception to the rule. Most of their contemporaries continued to play up and down every shit-hole in England.

Quote:

You continue to confuse mainstream acceptance and popularity with musical influence. And your criteria for "influential" (sheet music sales, high school band covers) is a joke. The way you judge influence is on subsequent generations of musicians. And not just university orchestras, but real live bands. Obviously, the Pistols have not had a huge influence on sheet music sales - duh.Smile Although again, I would suggest that the plain old vanilla mainstream has ALSO been thoroughly and permanently and radically altered by Punk's influence. You just kinda need to open your eyes a little. Chris

I think that there are two distinct influences in question. One is a musical influence. And IMHO I think the Beatles are more influential in this regard. The second is the cultural influence. The Sex Pistols and the punk movement in England was a reaction to years of a crippling recession and the apparent insensitivity of the Government and the Monarchy. The Beatles success was an unprecedented cultural phenomenon and unlikely to be repeated. Culturally, both have been massively influential.

[maxim]

chris wrote:

"We can probably save the "who invented punk rock" thing for another thread."

the saints

[groucho]

Quote:

And IMHO I think the Beatles are more influential in this regard.

Well, the question of who is technically MORE influential could certainly be argued all day - and will of course largely depend on where you're looking. But I think it's fair to say that both bands have been sufficiently influential to Rock music to warrant being mentioned in the same sentence. Which I believe is where this started.

I still think that surveying the music scene of the last couple decades in its *entirety* (not JUST top 40), you'd have at least as easy a time detecting overt Pistols influences as overt Beatles influences.

I always say about Bob Dylan that if you write songs, he influenced you whether you realize it or not, simply because he expanded the notion of what it was possible to write about so enormously.

You could probably make the same case for the Beatles having this type of very broad indirect influence over nearly all of popular music. However when I listen to much of today's music I hear a lot of very DIRECT punk/Pistols influence. Much more than DIRECT Beatles influence. And I'm not just talking about today's punk music - if there even is such a thing anymore.

Chris

[kraster]

Music was never the strong point of the Pistols. Attitude and delivery was their strong point. Their Music is still just a more abrasive take on traditional Rock and Roll. They probably weren't the greatest exponents of punk but they were the most visible. And by default their name is synonymous with the punk movement.

The Irony is that nowadays you can see the influence of the Beatles on the music and the influence of punk on the style. So all of us are right to a certain degree.  

P.S. Who killed Bambi?

[maxim]

walt disney

[Ronny]

groucho wrote on Sat, 11 March 2006 21:25

Ronny wrote Punk music is more underground, no big record sales, no big influence and mostly made up of musicians that could sniff glue better than they could play guitar. Ronny wrote I never said that they weren't influential, to not see that they weren't influential is ignorant even at my age and perspective, as all high profile bands have influence. Not influential... then influential. Underground... then high-profile... Consistency really isn't your thing is it, dude? Quote: The vocals are often still twangy, but a lot of the arrangements and instrumentation are what we called southern rock 25 years ago. Take away the twangy vocals and you have The Outlaws, Lynyrd Skynyrd and the Allman Bros.     What on earth are you talking about? Country music today is simply mainstream Pop with boots and buckles. It doesn't bear the slightest resemblence to southern rock. If it did it might not be so nauseating. Every post you type shows the narrowness of your circle of awareness here, Ronny. There's obviously a great deal that you've missed out on. Including the massive revolution Punk kicked off, which seemingly passed you by entirely. Quote: No single band is the only influence, be it the SP's or the Beatles. Uh... who said otherwise? Are you even reading what's being written here? Quote: how long the band was in the mainstream, how much sheet music is sold, how many universities, colleges, high schools, junior high schools that learn and perform Beatles songs, even to this day, versus how many learn and perform SP tunes? You continue to confuse mainstream acceptance and popularity with musical influence. And your criteria for "influential" (sheet music sales, high school band covers) is a joke. The way you judge influence is on subsequent generations of musicians. And not just university orchestras, but real live bands. Obviously, the Pistols have not had a huge influence on sheet music sales - duh. Although again, I would suggest that the plain old vanilla mainstream has ALSO been thoroughly and permanently and radically altered by Punk's influence. You just kinda need to open your eyes a little. Chris

Chris, I'm offering tangible points, influence has everything to do with how many people cover the songs, how much sheet music is sold and how many records are bought, doesn't matter if it's punk or blues or country. You on the other hand are only giving me your opinion. You want me to believe that the SP's were more influential than the Beatles, show it to me. I'm trying to leave my opinion of the SP's talent out of it. Let's talk tangible elements of influence. Obvioulsy there is a bit of a generation gap here, some of the people that would say the SP's were more influential weren't even born when the Beatles were together, so I'm trying to show them the sales and sheet music side of it. I was here when the Beatles started and I was here when the SP's first got together, so who's really the ignorant person here?

You obviously don't listen to country music if you can't relate to what the other poster and I'm saying about it being the same instrumentation that we called southern rock 25 years ago. If you like the SP's that's fine, but I got into this discussion because I heard people saying that the SP's were the "most influential band of all time", that's not so, I can show you tangible proof with record sales, sheet music sales and covering of the band's songs, that the Beatles over the total history of rock and roll had a bigger influence than the SP's.

I downloaded and listened to the Johnny Rotten PiL thing on Dick Clark, if that's entertainment and better than the Beatles I fail to see it. It sounds like beating on tin fucking cans to me and they weren't even playing live panomiming to a shitty recording. Call me old and out of the loop, but ignorant, no I'm not ignorant, unexposed maybe by choice, but I don't see any proof, only opinions about the SP's.

Let's break it down into single musicianship.

Lydon vocals - how many singers list him as their main influence. Compare to how many singers list John Lennon, Paul McCartney, Paul Rodgers as their main influence

Steve Jones - guitar, how many guitarists mention him as their main influence. Compare with Jimi Hendrix and Eric Clapton.

Sid Vicious - do we really need to compare his bass playing to John Entwhistle's or Larry Graham, Bootsy Collins, Stanley Clarke, Billy Sheehan, Victor Wooten? I should be shot for putting Vicious in the same paragraph.

Paul Cook - list some drummers that mention him as their main influence and compare to how many mention being influenced by Buddy Rich, Ginger Baker.

What I see here is a lot of opinions and not much on substantiated evidence presented.  

[groucho]

Quote:

What I see here is a lot of opinions and not much on substantiated evidence presented.

What I see here is you continually confusing this with a discussion of personal taste or "who's best".

What I see here is you repeating the same (already refuted) points, while ignoring the points that have already been made, and continually saying things that make you look ridiculous (see recent country music comments...).

What I see here is that you don't know very much about the last 30 years of music history, despite your (presumably) advanced years.

What I see here is a conversation that is going nowhere. If you're unable to see the influence of a band as seminal as the Pistols - despite what you may personally think of them as musicians - and if you continue to cling to sheet music sales and cover versions as the main criteria for "influential" in Rock, which 1) generally does NOT rely on written scores, and 2) generally does NOT rely on cover versions... well, I can't imagine what I can do to enlighten you.

Carry on.

Chris

[MB]

Ron not like I care that much but look up the terms red herring and non sequitur.

By your logic any mid-table flamenco player should be more famous than the Beatles.

Music only has limited meaning outside its social context. And the social impact of the Sex Pistols was immense and historical. Anyone arguing against this is speaking from a position of ignorance. Anyone who would try to diminish such impact by some sort of redirection to "the music" is again missing the point: what has more impact on the human condition; music as a visceral experience, or music that changes the social context of said experience? The Pistols are in the latter camp. The important one. Name one Eagles song that the establishment feared would bring down the Monarchy? Name one Fleetwood Mac song that caused a riot? That made young people think differently about the world and their place in it?

Until you start understanding the Sex Pistols in terms that matter you'll continue be stuck in a specious morass. Start with dark ages England 1977 and go from there.

[freshvictims]

Quote:

Chris, I'm offering tangible points, influence has everything to do with how many people cover the songs, how much sheet music is sold and how many records are bought, doesn't matter if it's punk or blues or country. You on the other hand are only giving me your opinion. You want me to believe that the SP's were more influential than the Beatles, show it to me. I'm trying to leave my opinion of the SP's talent out of it. Let's talk tangible elements of influence. Obvioulsy there is a bit of a generation gap here, some of the people that would say the SP's were more influential weren't even born when the Beatles were together, so I'm trying to show them the sales and sheet music side of it. I was here when the Beatles started and I was here when the SP's first got together, so who's really the ignorant person here?

Influence is hard to quantify, in the sense that record sales have no direct correlation and sheet music is loaded with assumptions. Does that mean bands today are really, influenced by Benjamin Britten? I get sick of rock bands namechecking hymns, it just gets boring   - it's "Amazing Grace" this and "Coventry Carol" that - get some new influences!

Quote:

Lydon vocals - how many singers list him as their main influence. Compare to how many singers list John Lennon, Paul McCartney, Paul Rodgers as their main influence Steve Jones - guitar, how many guitarists mention him as their main influence. Compare with Jimi Hendrix and Eric Clapton. Sid Vicious - do we really need to compare his bass playing to John Entwhistle's or Larry Graham, Bootsy Collins, Stanley Clarke, Billy Sheehan, Victor Wooten? I should be shot for putting Vicious in the same paragraph. Paul Cook - list some drummers that mention him as their main influence and compare to how many mention being influenced by Buddy Rich, Ginger Baker.

Isn't this a bit like going "well you never hear rock guitarists namechecking django rheinhardt so he was irrelevant"? (The way the Mariachi scene sidelines Miles Davis shows what little influence he has.) As a generalisation, the kind of musicians who are influenced by SP are less likely to be sitting in their bedrooms practising the bassline to "Pretty Vacant" than they are to be writing their own songs and gigging. You're missing a massive difference in musical cultures, again simplifying: the culture of learning vs the culture of doing. (Yes I know this caricatures both camps)

Secondly, I would never emulate their style but that's not to say they've not influenced my music. I love Les Claypool but I would be an idiot to try to play bass like him in any band except Primus. And then I would be a bigger idiot!

[Guest]

LATEST: SEX PISTOLS star JOHN LYDON has further explained his decision to boycott the punk group's induction to the Rock + Roll Hall of Fame on Monday (13MAR06), insisting he balked at the idea of having to pay to be told he was famous. In a statement released at the end of last month (FEB06), angry Lydon - aka JOHNNY ROTTEN - claimed he had been charged $25,000 (GBP14,700) for a table at the induction ceremony. In the hand-written press release, the GOD SAVE THE QUEEN singer called the Rock + Roll Hall of Fame and Museum "a p**s stain," stating, "We're not coming and we're not your monkey." Speaking on former Pistols bandmate STEVE JONES' Los Angeles radio show on Friday (10MAR06), Lydon raged, "They're self appointed sods. "I don't mind getting something for nothing but I don't wanna pay for it. I don't mind being paid to be famous but I'm not paying them to tell me I'm famous." The punk rock icon reveals it's isn't the first time he's been opposed to the officials behind the Hall of Fame and Museum. He recalls, "Years ago when I was doing ROTTEN TV for VH-1 we were gonna shoot an episode there at the museum and they wouldn't let us." Then, Lydon discovered the museum claimed to have handwritten Pistols songs he had penned and signed as part of a tribute to the punk group. He says, "It was phoney but they said they had irrefutable proof these were for real. It seems my word isn't good enough but my words are. "They were selling you a load of old cack... They were never interested in the truth."
11/03/2006 09:50

from: http://www.contactmusic.com/

[maxim]

it seems neil young thought he was important enough to be namechecked alongside elvis presley

[Werewolf10]

maxim wrote on Sun, 12 March 2006 17:33

it seems neil young thought he was important enough to be namechecked alongside elvis presley

ahahahahaha that does not surprise me.  

And just for the record, "The Misfits" influenced me wayyy more than the "Sex Pistols".. well as far as punk goes.  And I imagine im not the only one..