rockpile Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 yeah, as old as his schtick is he still reals 'em in. this time he got Rock and X, i really thought those guys had a clue. i guess barnum was right. I like havng pointless debates with JSP.
Cripes Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 Punk music is the lowest form of music, even modern pop and hip hop takes more talent then Punk. Which completely misses the point of punk. Punk was a reaction to the elevation of rock music as "important," formal and discerning... when it it should have remained loose, llive, experimental and dangerous, like it was in the early days of Elvis, Buddy Holly and Eddie Cochrane. "Talent" is what gave rock and roll the 25-minute keyboard wankings of Rick Wakeman, the drum solo, and Led Zeppelin's "Presence." If musicianship and talent is your barometer of taste, you shouldn't even be llstening to rock. Your CD changer should instead be filled with nothing but Mozart, Charlotte church, Yo Yo Ma, Charlie Parker and the Four Tenors.
RuntheDamnBall Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 Which completely misses the point of punk. Punk was a reaction to the elevation of rock music as "important," formal and discerning... when it it should have remained loose, llive, experimental and dangerous, like it was in the early days of Elvis, Buddy Holly and Eddie Cochrane. "Talent" is what gave rock and roll the 25-minute keyboard wankings of Rick Wakeman, the drum solo, and Led Zeppelin's "Presence." Not to mention capes in rock and roll. If you ask me, Spinal Tap's a pretty good barometer of the hubris of rock's self-importance and institution.
VABills Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 Which completely misses the point of punk. Punk was a reaction to the elevation of rock music as "important," formal and discerning... when it it should have remained loose, llive, experimental and dangerous, like it was in the early days of Elvis, Buddy Holly and Eddie Cochrane. "Talent" is what gave rock and roll the 25-minute keyboard wankings of Rick Wakeman, the drum solo, and Led Zeppelin's "Presence." If musicianship and talent is your barometer of taste, you shouldn't even be llstening to rock. Your CD changer should instead be filled with nothing but Mozart, Charlotte church, Yo Yo Ma, Charlie Parker and the Four Tenors. Actually on my car radio, classic is one of my programmed channels and is my daughters favorite. I listen to it as well, but like older classic rock as well. But nothing beats a good mozart or bach.
Johnny Coli Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 This is true, they were a stage show first, musicians second And still way better then the Ramones Atleast the members of kiss could play their instruments, Heck, I'll put the Monkeys as more talented musicians over the Ramones. I heard they couldn't even play and sing at the same time. Punk music is the lowest form of music, even modern pop and hip hop takes more talent then Punk. If you can make loud noises and yell about the government and promote anarchy, you could be in a punk band. It takes 0 talent. The Ramones, the Sex Pistols, all 0 talent waste of airwaves This statement is completely ignorant. To even suggest that KISS were better musicians than the Ramones (or Paul Cook and Steve Jones of the Pistols) shows your complete lack of knowledge of the subject. The KISS roadies haven't plugged Paul Stanley's or Gene Simmons' instruments into actual amplifiers since the late 70s. I can name any one of hundreds of "punk" musicians that had far and away more talent than the majority of your 70s rock heros.
apuszczalowski Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 Which completely misses the point of punk. Punk was a reaction to the elevation of rock music as "important," formal and discerning... when it it should have remained loose, llive, experimental and dangerous, like it was in the early days of Elvis, Buddy Holly and Eddie Cochrane. "Talent" is what gave rock and roll the 25-minute keyboard wankings of Rick Wakeman, the drum solo, and Led Zeppelin's "Presence." If musicianship and talent is your barometer of taste, you shouldn't even be llstening to rock. Your CD changer should instead be filled with nothing but Mozart, Charlotte church, Yo Yo Ma, Charlie Parker and the Four Tenors. Thats the thing, theres a difference between being able to actually play an instrument, and having Talent, something Punk music contains neither of . I guess using the word talent may have been wrong cause most people use that to refer to stuff like classical music. Punk "musicians" (if you can call them that can barely string 2 chords together, and mostly just make noise. Guess what, Yoko Ono made "music" that was experimental and loose, and "dangerous", but that doesn't mean it was worth listening to, or was any good. I like music that I can sit there and say, it took more then just making noise and some lyrics against the government to create it.
apuszczalowski Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 This statement is completely ignorant. To even suggest that KISS were better musicians than the Ramones (or Paul Cook and Steve Jones of the Pistols) shows your complete lack of knowledge of the subject. The KISS roadies haven't plugged Paul Stanley's or Gene Simmons' instruments into actual amplifiers since the late 70s. I can name any one of hundreds of "punk" musicians that had far and away more talent than the majority of your 70s rock heros. Please, give a 2 year old a guitar and they can re-create Punk "Music"
Cripes Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 Please, give a 2 year old a guitar and they can re-create Punk "Music" And I'd buy that before I'd buy an Asia album.
Mark from Albany Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 ...Actually nor is there a better band today.
X. Benedict Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 Honorable mention goes out to T.Rex for coming up with one of the best opening licks in Rock.
rockpile Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 Honorable mention goes out to T.Rex for coming up with one of the best opening licks in Rock. I kind of like John Entwhistle's "I Feel Better" When I'm feeling blue, I stick a pin in the picture of you beside my bed, and I feel better, When I'm feeling sad, I remember that you were the worst lay I ever had, and I feel better!
linksfiend Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 Which completely misses the point of punk. Punk was a reaction to the elevation of rock music as "important," formal and discerning... when it it should have remained loose, llive, experimental and dangerous, like it was in the early days of Elvis, Buddy Holly and Eddie Cochrane. We need change, we need it fast Before rock's just part of the past 'Cause lately it all sounds the same to me!
erynthered Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 Please, give a 2 year old a guitar and they can re-create Punk "Music" Like finger nails on a chalk board.
Cugalabanza Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 I just read through this thread. I'm pretty sure I recall seeing a mention of Foghat. Come on…that is just not right, my friends. I was very happy to see RuntheDamnBall's mention of Captain Beefheart and His Magic Band. You cannot dismiss the genius of Zoot Horn Rolo and The Mascara Snake. Regarding the two year old. Sure, he could play some punk, but no way in hell is he gonna be able to handle all those drugs. And that's where your theory breaks down. Yes, The Ramones kick ass!
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted March 28, 2007 Author Posted March 28, 2007 Thats the thing, theres a difference between being able to actually play an instrument, and having Talent, something Punk music contains neither of . I guess using the word talent may have been wrong cause most people use that to refer to stuff like classical music. Punk "musicians" (if you can call them that can barely string 2 chords together, and mostly just make noise. Guess what, Yoko Ono made "music" that was experimental and loose, and "dangerous", but that doesn't mean it was worth listening to, or was any good. I like music that I can sit there and say, it took more then just making noise and some lyrics against the government to create it. Are you insane? Some of the greatest bands of all time were punk bands. Sex Pistols, Ramones, Misfits, etc... And "punk" is such a broad term, it encompasses hardcore, 70s-style, skate-punk, ska, pop-punk etc....you're going to tell me it's not a valued part of r'n'r history?
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted March 28, 2007 Author Posted March 28, 2007 Remind me to bring a few CDs and a bullet to the tailgate. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO I like Bob Dylan. Can't stand The Band.
tennesseeboy Posted March 28, 2007 Posted March 28, 2007 Eryn wanted to put the Captain and Tenille, but I disuaded him, as I don't think they are a band. He wanted to play "muskrat love" at his wedding....
/dev/null Posted March 28, 2007 Posted March 28, 2007 The Ramones are an excellent 70s band (and an excellent band compared against any other decade). But I'd have to go with Sabbath or Zeppelin as better bands
Beerball Posted March 28, 2007 Posted March 28, 2007 Eryn wanted to put the Captain and Tenille, but I disuaded him, as I don't think they are a band. He wanted to play "muskrat love" at his wedding.... He's a true romantic. A feminine romantic, but a romantic none the less. Nibbling on bacon, chewin' on cheese Sammy says to Susie "Honey, would you please be my missus?" And she say yes With her kisses
Recommended Posts