Were the UK rock kids listening to dance music before the US rock kids?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
I kind of assume they were. But maybe I'm wrong. I always of American rock kids discovering 'electronica' and rave with 'Fat Of The Land' or whatever about 10 years after the same happened here. Of course, you still get some people over here proclaiming that dance music is the work of the devil. I'm talking statistical trends.

I guess it was that line I was the first guy playing Daft Punk to the rock kids / I played it at CBGBs / Everybody thought it was crazy that got me thinking about it again. I mean Daft Punk - that's ridiculously late. Or is it just a misjudged lyric?


N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 18:12 (twenty-one years ago)

oh, this was meant for ILM. Delete please, or not, and create a fascinating ILE/M study.

N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 18:14 (twenty-one years ago)

Is this a thread about how Europeans and Americans are different?

Markelby (Mark C), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 18:22 (twenty-one years ago)

Does it involve a vague but clearly implied assertion of European superiority, albeit one that can be easily denied by disingenuous claims of simple curiosity?

Markelby (Mark C), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 18:23 (twenty-one years ago)

It's interesting, regardless.

Markelby (Mark C), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 18:24 (twenty-one years ago)

the lyric in question is deliberately off.

lauren (laurenp), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 18:24 (twenty-one years ago)

Yes, you are right, Mark, but it doesn't haven't to be like that. I think the thread can exist without snideness.

N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 18:25 (twenty-one years ago)

I never listened to dance music.

jel -- (jel), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 18:25 (twenty-one years ago)

Yes, it can. I withdraw my snideness with apologies.

Markelby (Mark C), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 18:27 (twenty-one years ago)

The snideness I was referring to was all mine!

N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 18:28 (twenty-one years ago)

But I was also being snidey by calling you on it.

Group hug.

Markelby (Mark C), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 18:29 (twenty-one years ago)

ok, uk kids were very fast to hip hop, linford christie fast.

gygax! (gygax!), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 18:29 (twenty-one years ago)

ah, put a sock in it.

jel -- (jel), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 18:29 (twenty-one years ago)

Lets all make love in london tonite.

N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 18:31 (twenty-one years ago)

Are you in London, N? And if not, when are you next going to be?

Markelby (Mark C), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 18:32 (twenty-one years ago)

he's glasgow's.

cozen (Cozen), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 18:32 (twenty-one years ago)

lauren OTM as per usual

@d@ml (nordicskilla), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 18:32 (twenty-one years ago)

I am interested in that line - can you explain what the deliberate wrongness is doing?

N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 18:34 (twenty-one years ago)

Daft Punk are rock music though.

jel -- (jel), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 18:35 (twenty-one years ago)

well... it's kind of wrong all over, if that makes any sense. when cbgb's "mattered," daft punk didn't exist. when daft punk began to "matter," cbgb's had totally fallen out of hipster currency (except as a cutural relic) and also, as you point out, it would have been far from groundbreaking.

lauren (laurenp), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 18:39 (twenty-one years ago)

What song is it from?

jel -- (jel), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 18:41 (twenty-one years ago)

lcd soundsystem's "losing my edge."

lauren (laurenp), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 18:43 (twenty-one years ago)

Madchester to thread! Madchester to thread!

Aaron W (Aaron W), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 18:43 (twenty-one years ago)

But the rest of the lyrics aren't wrong all over, are they? I don't know enough about Can and Suicide chronologies to comment, but I can't see anything wrong with I was there in Jamaica during the great sound clashes / I woke up naked on a beach in Ibiza in 1988', for example.

N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 18:43 (twenty-one years ago)

oh that song, I gave that a 1 out of ten in the lost focus group!

jel -- (jel), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 18:44 (twenty-one years ago)

But the rest of the lyrics aren't wrong all over, are they?

i was just referring to the line you quoted in your question.

lauren (laurenp), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 18:48 (twenty-one years ago)

You'll always have people on either side of the pond buying into the "latest" trend, trying so hard to be hip. However, in this case, I think electronica was actually more of a scene in the UK first because the radio playlists there aren't so rigid: more willing to play electronic tracks next to the latest from Blue (or the pop kitten du jour). Therefore, more of the rock kids got to hear it during a daily listen. In the US, electronica is still growing, more people get to hear it, but is seen as something the major stations can't easily label.

[If this thread is squarely about that Daft Punk lyric, then scrap today's session of musical Cliff's Notes.]

Nichole Graham (Nichole Graham), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 18:49 (twenty-one years ago)

So why did hem make that one 'deliberately off', lauren? That's what I mean.

N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 18:49 (twenty-one years ago)

It's a thread about how Europeans like soulless music more than Amerians do.

Rockist Scientist (rockistscientist), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 18:50 (twenty-one years ago)

aha. got it. simple answer: there's a strong sense of ridiculousness throughout the entire song of which this desperate claim is just one bit. while it may have jumped out you and prompted this train of thought, i think it's in keeping with the rest of the lyrics and not particularly weighted.

lauren (laurenp), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 18:54 (twenty-one years ago)

Oh yeah, it's all ridiculous, but it's not wrong (in a hipster sense) outside of that line, which makes it odd.

N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 19:00 (twenty-one years ago)

It wouldn't have been all that late if he was playing The New Wave or Rollin' and Scratchin'...plenty of rock kids didn't open up to electronic stuff until 94 or thereabouts.

mmmmsalt (Graeme), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 19:13 (twenty-one years ago)

if you're gonna be a total hairsplitting dork (not that you ever would be, mind), then you can find fault with other lyrics. it depends on how far you take it.
another way of looking at it: despite being not exactly "correct," cbgb's and daft punk are both pretty well know signifiers. it's probably a lot more effective to a wider audience than saying "i was the first one to play inner city" or something along those lines.

lauren (laurenp), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 19:14 (twenty-one years ago)

Sorry if I seemed a dork - I was genuinely interested in the deliberate wrongness thing.

N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 19:16 (twenty-one years ago)

i'm wearing the dork hat right along with you, my friend!

lauren (laurenp), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 19:17 (twenty-one years ago)

In 1981 I enjoyed electronic dance music such as Human League and Depeche Mode, on the radio.

i was listening to colourbox/ yello/ new order /mantronix and enjoyed the electro music that Peel played in 1985, even at 15 - I was ahead of my peers.

DJ Martian (djmartian), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 19:17 (twenty-one years ago)

i was dancing to electronic music in 1990. with about 700 other people. just don't ask me what the dj was spinning.

kephm, Wednesday, 3 March 2004 19:19 (twenty-one years ago)

When I think early dance music Detroit comes to mind, not London.

nickalicious (nickalicious), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 19:22 (twenty-one years ago)

Oh god, yeah. It was all coming from America.

N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 19:23 (twenty-one years ago)

[insert some line about prophets and rock kids]

N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 19:23 (twenty-one years ago)

Am I wrong? I don't even know! I'm horribly undereducated.

nickalicious (nickalicious), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 19:24 (twenty-one years ago)

In a similar mood to the famous 'Lady, if you have to ask...' thread, I wonder which was the first band to say "We've always had a dance element to our sound...".

The CBGBs ref is interesting re that infamous D.Byrne line however it went: "Disco production techniques are much more of a revolution than punk". (I can't be arsed to look it up). I think THeads were copping dance cred a long time before UK punx (who chose reggae/dub as their ideal other.)

Jerry the Nipper (Jerrynipper), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 19:28 (twenty-one years ago)

I think it was the Soup Dragons. Tim Hopkins thinks so too.

N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 19:29 (twenty-one years ago)

The Soup Dragons were dance music? Since when? Always thought them a bit on the lite side to claim that.

Nichole Graham (Nichole Graham), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 19:31 (twenty-one years ago)

cabaret voltaire - also deserve massive respect.

DJ Martian (djmartian), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 19:32 (twenty-one years ago)

soup dragons cashed in on baggy dance craze - making shite indie-dance shuffle music for uni student discos.

DJ Martian (djmartian), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 19:33 (twenty-one years ago)

(meta: I much prefer the ILE kids talking about music to the ILM lam0rz )

Jerry the Nipper (Jerrynipper), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 19:34 (twenty-one years ago)

i think if you took a hundred us kids vs a hundred uk kids you would find the majority of us kids are not into electronica at all.

kephm, Wednesday, 3 March 2004 19:35 (twenty-one years ago)

Nichole - 'there's always been a dance element to our music' was a joke levelled at bands jumping on the indie-dance bandwagon, so yes.

N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 19:35 (twenty-one years ago)

meta: the inadvertent experiment seems to have led to this thread getting bogged down in pedantry about LCD Soundsystem lyrics and its ILM counterpart getting bogged down in chart positions of go-go singles. I am as yet undecided.

N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 19:37 (twenty-one years ago)

meta: I much prefer the ILE kids talking about music to the ILM lam0rz

The fact that there is an ILM version of this thread (which has gone down a different avenue of discussion and started referencing hip-hop) has been completely messing with my head for the last few minutes. I was scrolling through thinking 'how the hell did it go from Talking Heads to Musical Youth so quickly?'

mmmmsalt (Graeme), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 19:45 (twenty-one years ago)

Scrolling up I should say...

mmmmsalt (Graeme), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 19:46 (twenty-one years ago)

i'm mainly responsible for the pedantry, i fear. i'm so tempted to forward bits of this to mr.murphy. it reminds of the time that he was called out on ilm for mispronouncing rakim (as in eric b. &) at the end of the track, which he thought was hysterical.

lauren (laurenp), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 19:48 (twenty-one years ago)

i think the door has swung open on a number of occasions to let rock kids into dance music, it seems to swing closed again right after, and there is this sharp influx, then there is a period before it opens again. i think this is a peculiarly british thing though, and nothing to do with rock or dance music per se. i think america is a more slow burning constant type of place, the smallness here more conducive to rapid intakes or genre-crossers

as for america, although i guess they weren't really rock kids as such (although maybe they were, i don't know), minnesota has always fascinated me, because, as i understand it (drop bass network, woody mcbride etc), there was a very big scene there in the mid90s?

i think this question is interesting in ways i'm not really sure of yet

gareth (gareth), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 19:49 (twenty-one years ago)

Is that a gareth as Jedi Master putdown?

N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 19:59 (twenty-one years ago)

But what about dance kids getting into rock music? At my school, dance music was always more popular.

jel -- (jel), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 20:05 (twenty-one years ago)

Being unable to let go of the pedantry...

I think that Daft Punk is probably the best reference that could have been made in the lyric. It was rock kid (or, strictly speaking, indie kid) friendly music that was also acceptable to house / techno kids...the music nerd narrator is not saying that he introduced electronic music to rock kids, he's saying that he played them electronic music that they could really get into that wouldn't get them mocked too badly by other music nerds (unlike, say, Fatboy Slim or the Prodigy).


Back on topic...

As for rock kids in the US being late to dance music...it's hard to say. the former rock kids and skater types who were throwing parties that played UK 'ardcore (and later Jungle) in NY in the early nineties looked to London for the music they wanted to dance to in much the same way that UK party organizers in the late 80s had looked to Chicago.


mmmmsalt (Graeme), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 20:09 (twenty-one years ago)

put jel you left school in 1994? correct? - that period early 90s was a very popular time for dance music, re: compared to now.

DJ Martian (djmartian), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 20:10 (twenty-one years ago)

left high school in 1992, it was all dance back then (adamski - killer, the song of my nightmares), I've always assumed that dance has remained dominant, but that is probably just a very rock p.o.v.

jel -- (jel), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 20:13 (twenty-one years ago)

though, I did kinda like Star Trekin' by the Firm, and Pump Up the Volume.

jel -- (jel), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 20:14 (twenty-one years ago)

and Altern-8 were admiringly silly, not that I can remember what they sounded like.

jel -- (jel), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 20:15 (twenty-one years ago)

1991/ 1992 - the shops were chocka stocked with new dance compilations every week - often selling vast quantities.

DJ Martian (djmartian), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 20:15 (twenty-one years ago)

Star Trekkin' was *not* dance music!

N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 20:16 (twenty-one years ago)

hehe! ;)

jel -- (jel), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 20:17 (twenty-one years ago)

N. you've obviously never been to a NYE party in the UK with a strong contingent of Scottish relatives.

the music mole (colin s barrow), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 20:19 (twenty-one years ago)

Again, I retirate that 'dance music' != 'music you can dance to'.

N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 20:21 (twenty-one years ago)

In my experience, European rock kids were way ahead of British rock kids in this respect. Gareth is OTM about the importance of geography and density in all this.

Also, bear in mind for a lot of the 90s dance music was omnipresent in the UK in a very mainstream way. I can't say for sure, but that doesn't seem to be the case with the US, hip-hop and rnb filled that role. I think the Prodigy-Chemical Brothers-Fatboy Slim inroads helped... 90s dance music was relatively easy to ease your way into. I'm sure all that chart rave stuff helped as well.

It's also possible that trance and later UK Garage blew the whole thing off course to an extent - all the rock kids I knew found techno, drum and bass and house easier to relate to in a way.
Trance in particular seemed to be the byword for outright derision.

And it would be foolish to overlook the importance of drugs in all this.

Matt DC (Matt DC), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 20:21 (twenty-one years ago)

What about Jive Bunny?

jel -- (jel), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 20:22 (twenty-one years ago)

Yeah - why did E not catch on in the USA until like, 2000 or something?

Was Blondie's 'I'm On E' really about E?

N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 20:23 (twenty-one years ago)

(I am prepared to accept that Debbie Harry is likely to have been 20 years ahead of the rest of America in all things)

N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 20:24 (twenty-one years ago)

not a put down n, the question is more difficult than it first appears!

i'd say e did hit america around 92 also, but in pockets, california and minnesota in particular? (but am on possibly tenuous ground now)

i think this thread is calling for the presence of messrs chow and matos

gareth (gareth), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 20:29 (twenty-one years ago)

Also? In the UK it was surely 5 years before?

N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 20:30 (twenty-one years ago)

yes, sorry, superfluous 'also', possibly superfluous '92', i was thinking about something else at same time as typing

gareth (gareth), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 20:33 (twenty-one years ago)

um,ravEs were all over the east coast in 1991,92. i remember one in chinatown in paticular, had to take a slow creepy ride up a elevator that was bathed in blue neon; v. b blade runner.

kephm, Wednesday, 3 March 2004 20:36 (twenty-one years ago)

i'd say e did hit america around 92 also, but in pockets, california and minnesota

It was definitely in some of the bigger NYC clubs in 88 (my girlfriend used to work at Danceteria / Tunnel back then and remembers it being all over the place)...probably earlier in the case of underground / gay clubs? I remember reading somewhere that its earliest regular recreational use was in clubs in Texas (while it was still legal and could be purchased at the bar).

mmmmsalt (Graeme), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 20:53 (twenty-one years ago)

e was legal in the states until '85, i think - one could apparently buy it in bars in texas. after that, it was deemed a schedule 1 substance - maximum abuse potential, zero therapeutic utility. it seems like there was a boom in usage when raves hit big in the early 90s, but i don't think it was ever as common as in the uk. it's still fairly hard to get here, quite expensive, and of wildly varying quality - not like the nice cheap stuff that goes out through europe via the netherlands.

lauren (laurenp), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 21:06 (twenty-one years ago)

Wasn't 'Non-Stop Erotic Cabaret' by Soft Cell partly inspired by them taking E in NYC in the early 80s? I'm sure I read/heard that somewhere.

Andrew L (Andrew L), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 21:28 (twenty-one years ago)

why wasn't E more popular in rap circles in early 90s America?

stevem (blueski), Wednesday, 3 March 2004 21:28 (twenty-one years ago)

I can supply all answers needed here - even about the Minnesota stuff (W. McBride was a friend of mine).

1. 'X' for sale in Dallas, in bars, until '85. Spent my entire freshman year listening to a rich girl from Corpus Christi talk about how she put it on Daddy's Amex and how she was missing it since reclassification.

2. Memorabilia by Soft Cell is the first acid track. It is oddly one of the very first records I got (my dad got it in a job lot of records sent to his bar for le jukebox). MA and the Taboo crew had the first ecstasy of Brits.

3. Chicago/Detroit made the records, sure, but it was a gay thing in Chi (Warehouse = house) and a Kraftwerk thing in D; hence techno. This goes great lengths to explaining the midwest thing as a grassrots development; also the record stores which did imports and employed many DJs were owned by the same people who owned Twin City Imports and the second the British started picking up on house/techno (Matos' and my pal Rod would probably say the music started being possible/our ears changed due to midi) it kind of melded with their industrial bent and their anglophile bent and the seeds were planted (Chi also had WaxTax which those not from Chi would mix with the house).

Meanwhile, I'm in NY and in '87 my Detroit friend's boyf was working in Transmat. Moby is DJing our dances, dropping the kind of playlists that would be called techno/Balearic in a couple of years. People are excited about Haçienda/London coverage due to Anglophilia and wanting new stuff. Some might call these people scenesters, but they are all new! music! inquisitive! and total music pushers/musicians/writers in training. The second the stuff gets written about in NME, we're all over it (irony: Helen, one of my best friends NOW initiated that coverage before I knew her). We like too many genres to be indie kids.

4. In the Midwest, things are interesting. Woody, a 1st Ave DJ, gets into rave. Lots of people like New Beat and nitrous. There's a guy called David Prince who did Furthur, a rave in the Midwest, which was a marker for hippie raves in like '94. Things were happening in MN/WI/IL/MI from '91/2 and it commodified from '93. Candy ravers everywhere, plugged into a pronoia hippie thing as an alternative to grunge and Phish/Deadheading. There were a few radio shows but you had to participate if you wanted to hear the music.

5. British culture has a way of desegregating things wihich would be incredibly segregated in their countries of origin, which is what happened to house/tech AND hip-hop here. Also no palaver between disco freaks and rappers with homophobia issues in the UK, unlike US.
Besides, the keenest Brits made hay while the sun shone over this one and put their trainspotter side to good use getting hold of the records and making connections with their makers.

Aagh massive post and am prob not done yet.

suzy (suzy), Thursday, 4 March 2004 00:05 (twenty-one years ago)

keep going suzy!

cozen (Cozen), Thursday, 4 March 2004 00:11 (twenty-one years ago)

6. New Order own all the fingers in all the pies here: they owned the Hacienda, they got remixed by NY soundfactoryish/gaydiscoish people in '83/'84 and a lot of these records put a rocket up Detroit. Strangely, True Faith is something of a cement record for 'dance' in the L'80s in that it made it possible for a lot of white people in US and UK to get a handle on things. The more astute ones knew the 'geneaology' of their remixes already so were receptive to hearing those things in electro/records like Rockit/Warm Leatherette/Grace Jones. Mancs treated these new US records like Northern soul rarities and the social consciousness of rap (White Lines!!!!) allowed Detroit and Chicago to be seen as hotbeds of underprivileged overtalent, with all rockist romantic associations therein. Once a group of people can attach this 'importance' to something, concepts like lineage and connections are pretty easy to work out (you have to remember that it's always been a seamless US/Europe thing for me, as people in indie groups like the Woodentops featured 'before' and 'after' for me and friends who were involved in the music were the kind of people who had both Paul Oakenfold and Underground Resistance in their phone books, on both sides of the Atlantic). After dance records started to top the charts New Order then did Technique in Ibiza through 1989, birthplace of Balearic sets and European hippy raving (these days Ibiza is really obvious Maxim-reader territory), and done in hyperquick historic homage.

7. American 'dance' was in its warehouse party/infancy/gay bar phase when there were M25 orbital parties and E by the truckload in Britain. There is this whole interlude of mainstream activity in Britain that maybe resonated with clubbers in NYC who liked SNAP! and Technotronic; Queen Latifah and Monie Love had house elements in their hip-hop but as said before the male rappers were NOT down with house at all, as it was considered pejoratively gay by most of them (which was an easy enough conclusion to be drawn because of Sound Factory). That's when Hacienda had that week-long NYC residency where Deee-lite played (hello, Project X club kids) and so did Happy Mondays, where Anthony H. Wilson said 'wake up America, you're dead!'. Also in greater NYC there's the Latin influence coming in which may have kept people whose British doppelgangers would be really into it, right out of it and busy with that hot 97 sound.


suzy (suzy), Thursday, 4 March 2004 01:04 (twenty-one years ago)

Fantastic stuff, suzy.

the music mole (colin s barrow), Thursday, 4 March 2004 01:20 (twenty-one years ago)

(the short answer is that there were catalysers on both sides of the atlantic that one could call onside of rock or (post)punk who were into it simultaneously and did not have that 'disco sucks' attitude, and these people networked, often before they realised that's what was going on. In the less fragmented British market/media climate this approach went mainstream faster for lots of good 'size of country' reasons, whilst in America with its segregated playlists and large-country handicap things stayed cult, if big cult. Didn't matter to the artists as they were always over here playing out, getting minted)

suzy (suzy), Thursday, 4 March 2004 01:36 (twenty-one years ago)

I still find it so funny that people suggest LCD didn't actually mean the band Daft Punk, I mean why would they put the two words together, I'm sure they know of the existence of that popular French beat combo, Thomas and Guy-Manuel.

The entire song is a series of jokes.

Ronan (Ronan), Thursday, 4 March 2004 12:03 (twenty-one years ago)

I mean is it actually possible for anyone to say the word punk after the word daft without referring to the group?

Maybe in a cave somewhere.

Ronan (Ronan), Thursday, 4 March 2004 12:04 (twenty-one years ago)

I think the people who were suggesting that they didn't mean Daft Punk meant that that was the joke.

RJG (RJG), Thursday, 4 March 2004 12:06 (twenty-one years ago)

But then they do mean Daft Punk.

Ronan (Ronan), Thursday, 4 March 2004 12:08 (twenty-one years ago)

Nobody's mentioned Orgy yet

dave q, Thursday, 4 March 2004 12:12 (twenty-one years ago)

or Eskimos & Egypt

stevem (blueski), Thursday, 4 March 2004 12:21 (twenty-one years ago)

oh jeebus...

stevem you are a bad mang

CarsmileSteve (CarsmileSteve), Thursday, 4 March 2004 12:37 (twenty-one years ago)

What's wrong with Eskimos & Egypt?

N. (nickdastoor), Thursday, 4 March 2004 13:56 (twenty-one years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.