Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 9,411
Member is Online
|
Post by Confessor on Mar 5, 2019 18:58:35 GMT -5
... if I was doing a British Invasion playlist, I'd probably load it with plenty of Beatles and Stones because, you know, they were the two leading lights of the movement (well, and the Dave Clark Five, but they were s**t). Some prominent music writer - I forget which one - wrote that in the first wave of the British Invasion there were five bands that had real musical merit: the Beatles, the Rolling Stones, the Kinks, the Zombies and the Animals. Does that seem about right? Yeah, that's a pretty accurate list of 1st wave British Invasion bands, in terms of those that had real musical merit. But actually, the aforementioned Dave Clark Five and those cheeky chappies Herman's Hermits had greater commercial success in the U.S. in 1964 and 1965 than The Kinks or The Zombies. The Stones too initially struggled in the U.S. when they visited hot on the coat tails of The Beatles. It wasn't until they released "Time Is on My Side" in late 1964 that they properly cracked America. Also, it's probably worth mentioning that Dusty Springfield had a couple of big hits in America in 1964 and she was definitely considered part of the British Invasion at that time. The Who were very much a 2nd wave British Invasion band, and late 2nd wave at that. Though they'd been having big pop star hits in the UK since early 1965, they didn't break through in the U.S. until they made their show stopping performance at the Monterey Pop Festival in June 1967. "I Can See For Miles", released in autumn 1967, was their first single that really did anything in America. The Troggs, The Yardbirds, and Them are three other notable and highly influential 2nd wave British Invasion groups. EDIT: The Hollies and Donovan would be two more major 2nd wave British Invasion acts.
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Mar 12, 2019 19:39:49 GMT -5
Yes, of course - I was forgetting the "Invasion" part of the term and just thinking about British pop music in general. I'm more interested in the music and the artists themselves, not so much in their conquest of the US market.
I suppose I could ask the following question in the Books Thread but this seems like a good place too: anyone have any book recommendations on any of these artists?
The Stones The Who The Kinks Bowie Roxy Music Yes, or perhaps 60s-70s prog in general UK punk scene (I hear England's Dreaming is the go-to) ...
I'm sure I'll think of some more later but that's enough for now.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2019 5:58:02 GMT -5
I picked up the latest issue of Vintage Rock: The editor, Michael Leonard, taught me something new. Here are some of his words from his editorial: Look back at the end of the year charts in the 1950s and, despite what you may like to think, you won't find a nation in thrall to rock 'n' roll. Sure, Elvis Presley was massive. But across both the US and the UK (which was always more conservative anyway), it was relatively slim pickings for the kings, princes and queens of rockabilly. Perry Como, Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin and Paul Anka were much more likely to be regularly spinning on those all-new, all-exciting radiograms, and although the spurt in the growth of the single - the vibrant, some say "pure" rock 'n' roll format - certainly helped young rockets, their craft was still largely a cult concern.
In the UK, at least, the whole Top 10 LPs of the 1950s (bar one Elvis compilation and Lonnie Donegan's Showcase) were musical soundtracks - South Pacific, The King & I, West Side Story, Oklahoma! et all...If you are interested in the issue, which has a CD featuring 26 modern-day rockabilly tracks, you can buy it here: www.newsstand.co.uk/195-Rock-Music-Magazines/16455-Subscribe-to-VINTAGE-ROCK-Magazine-Subscription.aspx
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 9,411
Member is Online
|
Post by Confessor on Mar 13, 2019 9:46:11 GMT -5
Look back at the end of the year charts in the 1950s and, despite what you may like to think, you won't find a nation in thrall to rock 'n' roll. Sure, Elvis Presley was massive. But across both the US and the UK (which was always more conservative anyway), it was relatively slim pickings for the kings, princes and queens of rockabilly. Perry Como, Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin and Paul Anka were much more likely to be regularly spinning on those all-new, all-exciting radiograms, and although the spurt in the growth of the single - the vibrant, some say "pure" rock 'n' roll format - certainly helped young rockets, their craft was still largely a cult concern.
In the UK, at least, the whole Top 10 LPs of the 1950s (bar one Elvis compilation and Lonnie Donegan's Showcase) were musical soundtracks - South Pacific, The King & I, West Side Story, Oklahoma! et all... Yeah, I knew that...and it's a similar story with punk or psychedelia or even grunge. For example, the idea that Punk dominated the charts -- or even dominated the majority of kid's listening habits -- right from 1977 is rubbish, as a cursory look at the charts in the late '70s will reveal. Disco acts were by far the bigger commercial force among teenagers at the time. Likewise, at the height of the Summer of Love, the album and single charts were still dominated by regular pop, easy listening records, and film soundtracks. Similarly, people are forever citing Nirvana and the grunge scene as having saved the world from '80s hair metal and manufactured pop overnight. Actually, those genres flourished well into '90s, and, in fact, there had already been a vibrant transatlantic indie/alternative rock scene that had been bubbling under since the late '80s. In the UK at least, alternative rock bands like the Stone Roses, Primal Scream, Blur and the Charlatans had all been doing rather well charts-wise, pre-Nirvana, thank you very much. The thing about these watershed moments in rock/pop history, is that obviously they are pivotal moments in the development of the art form. The advent of rock 'n' roll, psychedelia, punk and indie/alternative rock was huge in terms of the influence that the bands associated with those scenes had on subsequent music and fashion. But, the enormity of these genres' influence has meant that, when looking back, people tend to exaggerate or over egg their significance and importance at the time. Punk is probably the best example of this. Despite the Sex Pistols' commercial success in the UK and Europe (their success was negligible in the U.S. at the time...the Never Mind the Bollocks album didn't even go Gold in America until something like 1986!), there were very few other punk bands who made any meaningful impact on the British charts in the late '70s. Yes, the Clash had a few hits, as did the likes of the Buzzcocks and the Ramones, but really, it was post-punk, 2 tone, and New Wave music that took the punk esthetic overground and into the charts in a big way...and mostly in the early '80s, rather than the late '70s. The music scene of the late '70s was still dominated by saccharin pop, disco music, or AOR, with a generous dose of Reggae here in the UK.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2019 11:34:28 GMT -5
Thanks for that, Confessor.
I do see many media myths on all forms of entertainment (whether that be myths about wrestlers' drawing power or comic books' sales figures).
That's interesting about Never Mind the Bollocks not reaching Gold in the US until 1986. Wow!
|
|
|
Post by Mister Spaceman on Mar 15, 2019 20:33:38 GMT -5
Yes, of course - I was forgetting the "Invasion" part of the term and just thinking about British pop music in general. I'm more interested in the music and the artists themselves, not so much in their conquest of the US market. I suppose I could ask the following question in the Books Thread but this seems like a good place too: anyone have any book recommendations on any of these artists? The Stones The Who The Kinks Bowie Roxy Music Yes, or perhaps 60s-70s prog in general UK punk scene (I hear England's Dreaming is the go-to) ... I'm sure I'll think of some more later but that's enough for now. The Stones: Life by Keith Richards (the Stones' story from Keef's POV - thoroughly entertaining) Bowie: David Bowie: Starman by Paul Trynka (generally hailed as the best Bowie bio) David Bowie: Fame, Sound and Vision by Nick Stevenson (more of a cultural analysis of Bowie) UK punk scene: Last Gang in Town - Marcus Gray (specifically about the Clash but good window into the overall scene)
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Mar 17, 2019 19:31:18 GMT -5
Yes, of course - I was forgetting the "Invasion" part of the term and just thinking about British pop music in general. I'm more interested in the music and the artists themselves, not so much in their conquest of the US market. I suppose I could ask the following question in the Books Thread but this seems like a good place too: anyone have any book recommendations on any of these artists? The Stones The Who The Kinks Bowie Roxy Music Yes, or perhaps 60s-70s prog in general UK punk scene (I hear England's Dreaming is the go-to) ... I'm sure I'll think of some more later but that's enough for now. The Stones: Life by Keith Richards (the Stones' story from Keef's POV - thoroughly entertaining) Bowie: David Bowie: Starman by Paul Trynka (generally hailed as the best Bowie bio) David Bowie: Fame, Sound and Vision by Nick Stevenson (more of a cultural analysis of Bowie) UK punk scene: Last Gang in Town - Marcus Gray (specifically about the Clash but good window into the overall scene) Excellent, just the kind of recommendations I'm looking for, thanks. I have skimmed through Richards's book - at a friend's house one Christmas when he was given it as a present, but I could probably stand to read it through more thoroughly in a few years.
|
|
|
Post by beccabear67 on Mar 18, 2019 23:00:14 GMT -5
On books: for early Rolling Stones, 'The Origin Of The Species' by Alan Clayson and the book about Brian Jones written by Paul Trynka (they used a different title and cover photo for the U.S. and U.K. editions). Also anything with Bill Wyman's name on it. Keith may be entertaining but questionable in reliability.
Kinks: anything with a Davies name, have read others and can't recommend them.
Yes: whatever the latest edition of Chris Welch's 'Close To The Edge The Story Of Yes' is, and for just the early era of Yes (and before that Mabel Greer's Toyshop and The Syn which he was in with Chris Squire), 'Beyond And Before' by Peter Banks their original lead guitarist.
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 9,411
Member is Online
|
Post by Confessor on Mar 19, 2019 2:31:27 GMT -5
Keith may be entertaining but questionable in reliability. Agreed. Richards' autobiography Life is a really entertaining read, but there's enough errors that creep in to make you take most of what he says with a large pinch of salt. I felt the same way about Graham Nash's Wild Tales too. For me, the best Stones book would be Stanley Booth's The True Adventures of the Rolling Stones. Booth was off on tour with the band during the Let It Bleed/ Sticky Fingers era and also spent a lot of time hanging out in recording studios and hotel rooms with them. It nearly killed him. Once he left them and detoxed, he began writing the book, which describes his experiences with the band and also goes into their earlier history. Keith Richards has said that the book is the only Stones biography that he can read and say, "yeah...that's how it was."
|
|
|
Post by Mister Spaceman on Mar 20, 2019 22:36:44 GMT -5
Keith may be entertaining but questionable in reliability. Agreed. Richards' autobiography Life is a really entertaining read, but there's enough errors that creep in to make you take most of what he says with a large pinch of salt. Well, he lived it (and possibly wrote it) with a large pinch of something on hand, so ...
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Mar 20, 2019 23:31:33 GMT -5
Agreed. Richards' autobiography Life is a really entertaining read, but there's enough errors that creep in to make you take most of what he says with a large pinch of salt. Well, he lived it (and possibly wrote it) with a large pinch of something on hand, so ... And of course it's always going to be interesting for a fan to hear the story from his POV, inaccuracies and all. If any of the Beatles had written a book about their days in the band I'd probably want to read it, all the while knowing that the other members might tell a very different story.
I might even read that Stones book written by an ex-bodyguard or someone back in the 70s, if I ever see it around - though I believe Richards said was filled with inaccuracies or at least misleading accounts (e.g. IIRC, the last days of Richards's and Jagger's relationship with Jones). The Booth one sounds like it's several cuts above any of that kind of thing, of course. But I'm not averse to a bit of trash, as long as it isn't mean-spirited or a deliberate character assassination, like the ones that American guy wrote about Elvis and Lennon back in the late 70s (I think? forget the guy's name*). I've always avoided that kind of thing, while still enjoying trashy but fun reads like Hammer of the Gods (about Led Zep) and No One Here gets Out Alive (Jim Morrison).
*Albert Goldman - looked it up - and it was the 80s, not the late 70s; also, the Zeppelin book was by American music journalist Stephen Davis, and the Morrison one by Jerry Hopkins, another music writer, and Danny Sugarman, ex-manager of the Doors.
|
|
|
Post by Mister Spaceman on Mar 21, 2019 7:04:10 GMT -5
Well, he lived it (and possibly wrote it) with a large pinch of something on hand, so ... And of course it's always going to be interesting for a fan to hear the story from his POV, inaccuracies and all. If any of the Beatles had written a book about their days in the band I'd probably want to read it, all the while knowing that the other members might tell a very different story.
I might even read that Stones book written by an ex-bodyguard or someone back in the 70s, if I ever see it around - though I believe Richards said was filled with inaccuracies or at least misleading accounts (e.g. IIRC, the last days of Richards's and Jagger's relationship with Jones). The Booth one sounds like it's several cuts above any of that kind of thing, of course. But I'm not averse to a bit of trash, as long as it isn't mean-spirited or a deliberate character assassination, like the ones that American guy wrote about Elvis and Lennon back in the late 70s (I think? forget the guy's name*). I've always avoided that kind of thing, while still enjoying trashy but fun reads like Hammer of the Gods (about Led Zep) and No One Here gets Out Alive (Jim Morrison).
*Albert Goldman - looked it up - and it was the 80s, not the late 70s; also, the Zeppelin book was by American music journalist Stephen Davis, and the Morrison one by Jerry Hopkins, another music writer, and Danny Sugarman, ex-manager of the Doors.
Yeah, insider perspective is almost always interesting (though Tony Sanchez's Up and Down with the Rolling Stones is infamous for its outright fabrications, such as Keith's alleged "blood replacement" cure). And those Goldman books are notoriously mean-spirited, though I've never actually read one to confirm this.
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 9,411
Member is Online
|
Post by Confessor on Mar 21, 2019 10:19:38 GMT -5
If any of the Beatles had written a book about their days in the band I'd probably want to read it, all the while knowing that the other members might tell a very different story. George Harrion's 1979 autobiography I Me Mine will be of interest to you then. But I'm not averse to a bit of trash, as long as it isn't mean-spirited or a deliberate character assassination, like the ones that American guy wrote about Elvis and Lennon back in the late 70s (I think? forget the guy's name*). I've always avoided that kind of thing, while still enjoying trashy but fun reads like Hammer of the Gods (about Led Zep) and No One Here gets Out Alive (Jim Morrison). *Albert Goldman - looked it up - and it was the 80s, not the late 70s; also, the Zeppelin book was by American music journalist Stephen Davis, and the Morrison one by Jerry Hopkins, another music writer, and Danny Sugarman, ex-manager of the Doors. The Goldman books are hatchet jobs. Not really worth anything, in terms of the reader learning about their respective subjects. The Lennon book, in particular, is full of factual inaccuracies and is very poorly researched. Goldman supposedly conducted hundreds of interviews with those who "knew" Lennon, but none of the other Beatles were interviewed, nor was Yoko One or Cynthia Lennon, nor were any of Lennon's family, and not even people that new him in a more casual, work-related way, such as George Martin, Cilla Black, Derek Taylor or Elliot Mintz. Basically, he interviewed servants, gardeners, chauffeurs, and the like, along with people who had maybe met Lennon once or something. He then takes the info gleaned from these sources, mixes them with liberal doses of unsubstantiated conjecture, and comes to mean-spirited conclusions that tend to paint Lennon in as unflattering a light as possible. There is no benefit of the doubt given in the book at all. Like I say, "a hatchet job." Or, to quote Bono: "I don't believe in Goldman; his type is like a curse/Instant Karma's gonna get him, if I don't get him first."
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2019 10:26:23 GMT -5
Regarding that Vintage Rock magazine I mentioned a few posts back, a writer called Matt Shepherd wrote about Elvis' later career. Here is a small portion of the article:
It's very easy to write off Presley in the 1970s as someone who just recorded love songs about heartache, following his separation and ultimately divorce from the only woman he ever married, Priscilla.
But behind the headlines of his fading away, there really was still a lot of great music, even in the later years. While there are lots of songs that fit the melancholic mould, like Always On My Mind and Separate Ways, if you dig a little deeper into the King's 70s catalogue, you will discover blues, country, gospel and, yes, rock 'n' roll. For actual music, it's possibly his most remarkable decade.
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Mar 21, 2019 10:59:27 GMT -5
If any of the Beatles had written a book about their days in the band I'd probably want to read it, all the while knowing that the other members might tell a very different story. George Harrion's 1979 autobiography I Me Mine will be of interest to you then. But I'm not averse to a bit of trash, as long as it isn't mean-spirited or a deliberate character assassination, like the ones that American guy wrote about Elvis and Lennon back in the late 70s (I think? forget the guy's name*). I've always avoided that kind of thing, while still enjoying trashy but fun reads like Hammer of the Gods (about Led Zep) and No One Here gets Out Alive (Jim Morrison). *Albert Goldman - looked it up - and it was the 80s, not the late 70s; also, the Zeppelin book was by American music journalist Stephen Davis, and the Morrison one by Jerry Hopkins, another music writer, and Danny Sugarman, ex-manager of the Doors. The Goldman books are hatchet jobs. Not really worth anything, in terms of the reader learning about their respective subjects. The Lennon book, in particular, is full of factual inaccuracies and is very poorly researched. Goldman supposedly conducted hundreds of interviews with those who "knew" Lennon, but none of the other Beatles were interviewed, nor was Yoko One or Cynthia Lennon, nor were any of Lennon's family, and not even people that new him in a more casual, work-related way, such as George Martin, Cilla Black, Derek Taylor or Elliot Mintz. Basically, he interviewed servants, gardeners, chauffeurs, and the like, along with people who had maybe met Lennon once or something. He then takes the info gleaned from these sources, mixes them with liberal doses of unsubstantiated conjecture, and comes to mean-spirited conclusions that tend to paint Lennon in as unflattering a light as possible. There is no benefit of the doubt given in the book at all. Like I say, "a hatchet job." Or, to quote Bono: "I don't believe in Goldman; his type is like a curse/Instant Karma's gonna get him, if I don't get him first." Definitely will read Harrison's book someday, forgot he'd written one. Come on Ringo and Paul, there's still time!
yeah, no interest in reading Goldman. And the Sanchez one is less tempting if he was just making things up.
|
|