Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mortte Jousimo
That means they defined the worst decade in rock and roll history.
No. The Worst decades of RīN`r history have been 2000 & 2010 decades. These are the decades when Rīn`R has really became part of entertaining business (I really hate Idols, Talents-competitions and all kind of Voice of Bullshits). Yes, I know there have been maybe the largest amount of indie/alternative bands, but can you show me any style that is not less or more retro-influenced? Even a one band or artists that make totally never before heard music? Seventies music went forward, it took directions never heard before (prog-rock, punk, well punk was partly retro when taking lots of influences from sixties garage). Specially in the start of decade there were lots of great bands nobody hasnīt mentioned in this latest discussion (Spooky Tooth, Mountain, Free, Ten Years After, Family, Fairport Convention, Colosseum, Blue Öyster Cult, Mott the Hoople, Traffic, New York Dolls, Nazareth, really many prog-rock & krautrockbands, also many bands from non-US & non-UK). I really hate eighties plastic drums & synths, but that sound was also something new. And in the eighties became Sonic Youth, Nick Cave & the Bad Seeds, the Cure, Tom Waits greatest era started. Nineties there was grunge even it recycled punk & seventies heavy. In the 2000-2010 there has been anything revolutionary in Rock, no youth movements like in the earlier decades. I am really glad if you can show Iīm wrong because I really think youth movements in music are just great thing, I really donīt like when my kids are growing with idols and that sort of shit.
-The occasional endless blues solo. Seriously, after Hendrix why the hell did anyone bother?
I think you havenīt really listened Zeppelin studio-albums. Page doesnīt play lots of solos in them, in live situations yes (well In my Time of Dying yes, itīs just too long). I think IV is the greatest, I really love also Houses of the Holy (Itīs my first Zeppelin-album). Physical Graffiti is overrated, the third side is really great.
I love Zeppelin, Floyd, the Who, The Doors. My order in those bands are: Floyd>the Who>the Doors>Zeppelin. I canīt understand these comments about the Who, I think itīs maybe the most important band of rock history. I mean it has done succesfully almost all the music styles (I think they were also pioneers in putting electronic elements into rock music, I think before Baba OīRiley & Wonīt get Fooled again no-one has done those things). Have you all listened Tommy, Whoīs Next & Quadrophenia whole through?
|
Like I said, I think the Who got off to a great start. I used to have a pretty comprehensive oral history of the British Invasion and the years that immediately followed... It's not really fair to compare the Who to Zeppelin (which I have admittedly done in this very thread)... Stylistic differences are too big to ignore. They were essentially part of the tail end of the British Invasion era. Their music was more whimsical, psychedelic and scene-specific than Zeppelin's, and also, because of their contributions to the development of the synths and electronics, I think they were a good deal more musically adventurous.
I gotta say though... I hate Tommy. I hate Who's Next. Never dug A Quick One. Learned to love the Who Sell Out, and later learned to tolerate Quadrophenia, and I had a soft stop for Who Are You.
I think history has made a bigger deal out of the Who than was completely necessary. They had a lot of hiccups, and they didn't release anywhere near as much music as their contemporaries. The Beatles, Stones, Kinks, later Hendrix, the Dead, bands that played with them and toured with them. Zeppelin definitely whomped their asses on a cultural relevance scale, but I think their early years were spot on. Their were full of this crazy, frenetic energy... A little "woo-woo" and a bit "hippie-dippie" at times, but still they represented a wild eyed pill popping pre-punk era in youth culture, and I have to respect that.
Townsend was always trying to push the envelope and fulfill his destiny as a great composer and musician, but he got hung up on that shit. Hung up on his own legacy. So half of the moves he made were flat out fumbles. He never just went with the flow, and played from the heart. He played and composed from the head, and that's why their ambitions fell flat. Tommy was a massive mistake.
He's a bitter old cunt too. Probably because the Beatles seemed to create the exact kind of enduring, archetypal musical statements with ease, like, a couple times a year. They almost casually churned out these masterpieces that could be viewed as concept records, or just appreciated on a song by song basis. I expect the Who believed they could fill those shoes when the '70s kicked off, but they've released a mere 11 albums since their 1964 inception.
The '70s were full of a lot of bands occupying the cultural space that previously belonged to one. I find the entire decade depressing as hell.
Like post-Nirvana alt-rock on a global scale.