Ultimate Rhoads

I never liked punk whether its old like ramones or new like blink182/green day....

Its really,really basic music.No talent required,no music skills and none achieved imo.Like,name me a great punk guitarist?!!

What irks me is now all this punk retrospective crap that is appearing in the LA times or often enough on NPR radio.Talking about punk as being regarded as some great cultural event and movement from the 70s/80s.
Punk as i remember was a bunch of a hole juveniles delinquents looking to thrash and not learn their instruments.It was about getting drunk and being a loser and being proud of it.When i hear them glorify punk today i cant believe the nonsense they are spewing about it.At the same time metal is laughed at.You will never,ever hear the praises of metal on NPR.It wouldnt bother me except if they praise punk why not metal?

We had a great discussion about punk and grunge here a while back.
Personally I have to say emphatically no it doesn't suck! Yes, the simplicity of the songs means anyone can have a go, but like all things there are only a minority who have that special talent.

Punk and grunge came at times when metal became so full of self love and a parody of itself. Punk sticks a metaphorical finger up at that.

I prefer grunge, but we have the Ramones and The Pistols as well as Green Day in our collection.

Matt

.

Punk rock is basic, yes, so is Chuck Berry... for that matter, 95% of metal is basic with complicated solos.

Listen to early Maiden, if it weren't for the punk influence, Maiden wouldn't have been so intriguing in the early days. Grunge was just a dark version of punk with a demented Seattle twist.

xx123456

I dont know...i think punk is pretentious in thinking that it is rebellious.Isnt most rock rebellious?Here in LA we have kroq radio and for me it is the most unlistenable garbage ever.I listen to everythin including disco and rap on the car radio but not kroq.It is grating.I dont mind some punk songs but i will never put it on just like mariah carey.Its 2 chord mediocrity is an affront to my senses.Kind of like Poison.

However,my beef really is how punk is now being covered in traditional media as some sort of social movement of the 70s with some deep meaning.Uh,punk was about as deep as hair metal.Seriously, were talking musically retarded players screaming about how bad everything is,espousing anarchy,getting wasted,anarchy crap etc.Now im all for protests but write some good music and lyrics and have a legit cause i.e.: 60s music and the hippy movement.Punk brought about no such noble protests or intelligent social introspective.

I like punk for what it is...no punk band thinks or sees themselves as virtuosos at their instruments, or that their songs are miniature sonnets or anything like that.
It's not my favorite type of music, but I'd take punk over Madonna or the Jonas Brothers any day.

Black Flag, Ramones, Drunk Injuns and Dayglo Abortions were always playing at my buddy's half-pipe he built in his back yard. I love Black Flag's who's got the 10 and a half album. Great live recording.

Punk was a social movement in the '70's... It was about rebelling against the peace/love hippie mentality. A lot of kids in urban areas weren't feeling the love/peace by the mid-70's. It was also a protest against the self indulgent prog rock bands like Pink Floyd whom the punks felt took themselves to seriously. All the songs were short in opposition to bands like Zeppelin who were dragging songs out to the 20+ minute mark live. They were also rebelling against the over-processed mentality that produced disco.

The Sex Pistols, however, were a completely manufactured 'band' created to cash in on the trend.

...Ahhh fond memories...Pogoing away to the sound of '5 Minutes' by The Stranglers, 'Babylons Burning' by The Ruts, 'Holidays in the Sun' by The Sex Pistols and my personal favourite 'No Time to be 21' by The Adverts...What we should really be asking ourselves is why every band had 'The' in their name?!!!

...Who knows if it hadn't been for 'If You Want Blood...' (Live album) I could still be there now?!!!!!!

The Sex Pistols, however, were a completely manufactured 'band' created to cash in on the trend


Sorry mate,but that's absolute "bollocks". You've been reading too many books.

Jake66 wrote:The Sex Pistols, however, were a completely manufactured 'band' created to cash in on the trend


Sorry mate,but that's absolute "bollocks". You've been reading too many books.

So, if all the 'books' are wrong, what's the real story?

Maybe the wrong thing to put!!!

I've always been a huge fan of the Sex Pistols, Steve Jones is my favourite guitarist and has been for over 20 years.

The quote you put about the Pistols being manufactured to cash in on a trend i found to be quite a blinkered view, more like the way Malcolm McClaren would like you to view and one i found to be humourous, I meant no offence by my reply.

Like all bands,they were a product of their era and environment,they struck a chord (no pun intended!!) with me from an early age which i continue to have to this day. I saw your comment and found it a bit naive,but then i probably have similar opinions on a lot of other music and stuff. A lot of groups from that era and beyond cite the Pistols as a major influence,i'm not going to say they "invented" Punk,but they were a catalyst for a great number of bands from that era and to this day are still name-checked by many people. I don't think too many "manufactured" groups could say that.

Cheers

The Pistols were the band that the media latched onto when punk was beginning it's ascent. They formed the band with the intent of being a 'punk band' from what I understand - in other words, the movement had already begun, they liked it and formed the band because they liked the trend. The Ramones, on the other hand, hated the over-produced schmaltz coming out in the '70's, couldn't play at a high technical level and were a punk band as a result.

The thing with the Sex Pistols that makes me agree with McClaren's comment that they were manufactured is that in addition to having little talent, they really didn't care about being a band. This is evidenced by the fact that they disintegrated when they hit the US. Steve Jones now is a good guitar player, but in 1976 he wasn't so hot. He was a kid finding his way and I have a lot of respect for the journey he took.

I agree that the Pistols were a big influence at the time, but they were a spark plug that flashed bright for a moment and then died out. Without bands like them, bands like Iron Maiden would never have gotten out of the gate. I respect Maiden more than the Pistols because they took the punk influence and attitude and combined it with skilled playing and came up with something great. The Pistols just wanted to give a big F@#K YOU to the establishment and that's pretty much their legacy.

BY the way, Molly Hatchet was a 'manufactured' Southern Rock band created to cash in on the Allman Bros. and Lynyrd Skynyrd. They produced some great songs and are 'name-checked' as you put it, to this day in their genre. Manufactured isn't always bad. I just think too much credit was given to the Pistols when other bands stood the test of time and kept the flag flying.

I think we might have to agree to disagree on this subject