THANK YOU PUNK ROCK FOR DISMANTLING BOOMER MUSIC

boomer music > punk rock

punk rock > boomer music. and of these: DEVO

yeah devo

Devo is always the correct answer to everything.

new wave is the worst kind of music. are any of these bands actually punk??

Oversight #1:

"Take Me to the River" by the Talking Heads.

Oversight #2:

"Dear Prudence" by Siouxsie and the Banshees.

Oversight #3:

"I Can't Stand Myself" by James Chance and the Contortions.

heart of stone by the pagans iirc.

"stepping stone" by the sex pistols

everybody's got something to hide except for me and my monkey - feelies

also...

The United States Census Bureau considers a baby boomer to be someone born during the demographic birth boom between 1946 and 1964

so...according to this, aren't most of the punks actually baby boomers themselves?

new wave is the worst kind of music.

ian, no!

crabcore is certainly worse.

that 8 eyed spy cover of white rabbit is okay (its live and pretty short), but the 8 eyed spy studio cover of run through the jungle is even cooler. always loved it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgflfxMFaEA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIXg9KUiy00

take me to the river's reverence disqualifies it...

i toyed with including the run through the jungle cover too scott, i wasn't sure.

much apologies for overlooking the feelies...

thought this was so great when i was 15

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSwr6Eso6X4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eszWINbsQJg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BuzLLHNhcEo&feature=related

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Or2jLqSZX54

Though to be fair, BOC overlapped a bit with punk.

That Run Through the Jungle cover is great!

Not saying these deserve votes, but:
XTC "All Along the Watchtower"
Oingo Boingo "You Really Got Me"
B-52's "Downtown"
Siouxsie and the Banshees "Helter Skelter"

This was totally the thing to do on your debut album from like '77 to '81.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFUQ4JQCnf8

Proto-punk boomers prematurely dismantling boomer music.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TC0t4BaI6S8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhM5k_EGzaQ&feature=related

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIHt0Q4VXLk&feature=related

don't be silly, the kingsman's og "louie louie" (not really the og, i know, but still) is punker than anything by any of the bands posted on this thread

'nother run thru the jungle, but skots was better

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxAVXsT1mss

is patti smith "my generation" an oversight? i guess that one's more thank you punk rock for dismantling proto punk. good job dismantling though

patti smith IS a baby boomer

thank you baby boomer for dismantling yourself

every single artist named so far in this thread is a baby boomer (as m@tt h more or less already pointed out).

it's more like, thank you young baby boomer for dismantling your older sister jennifer's favorite records.

or in the case of the minutemen, thank you older sister jennifer for playing those awesome records for us. do you mind if we borrow 'em?

The Heartbreakers: Do You Love Me

(xp) and it's quite possible britney spears did a better job dismantling boomer music than any of the above.

and, of course, Bob Dylan, John Lennon, Marvin Gaye, etc, etc, all born pre-boom.

phish did a good job too. of dismantling. people were afraid of hippie shit for a long time cuzza the burnout nostalgia factor. it just seemed old. you were either on the bus or off it. now its just one option of many. no shame for the young to worship dylan these days.

...saw a Blonde Redhead sticker on a Cadillac...

patti smith IS a baby boomer

Pretty sure the Slits, Devo, Raincoats, and Lydia Lunch were, too. (Mark Mothersbaugh was born in 1950!)

Ah, somebody already said that (and thereby pointed out how dumb this thread idea is.)

It's interesting, insofar as much that we divide up musical generations by their fans, and the artists who produce the music tend to be around seven years older than their original fanbase.

The United States Census Bureau considers a baby boomer to be someone born during the demographic birth boom between 1946 and 1964

Perl Jam, the Boomer band.

fronted, at least.

yeah i think we all know what the words boomer music means without googling what year people who made boomer music were born

"Lola"'s great; not really better than the original, but I'd probably call it even.

As for oversights, does it have to be first-wave punk? I'd add Husker Du's "Ticket to Ride" (which may not exist on LP, not sure).

the slits' grapevine is not getting enough love here

that is true

Was going to add I voted Slits yesterday.

Automatic thread bump. This poll's results are now in.

Would YMO's version of "Day Tripper" fit into this? At least, to me, it is very remiscent of Devo's take on "Satisfaction" in that it completely turns the beat around.

Late addition:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TpGCOrxvwZA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yHWf74kg2cc

thought that boomers were generally understood to be folks who came of age in the late 50s, 60s, & early/mid 70s, ie big chill peeps, and that punk/disco = the canyon between boomers and gen x, belonging specifically to neither.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNry5C4PIrM&feature=related

dismantling

^^^ fucking badass

punk IS boomer music, though!

Nothing seems more depressing and hypocritical than some old punk dude who keeps going on about how punk bands need to honor their elders and constantly bow at the feet of the punk forefathers. It's maybe the ultimate in baby boomer hypocrisy, much worse than the hippies. To make a hegemony out of something that was supposed to destroy all dogmas is a way bigger renig of values than some "free love" asshole turning 40 and buying a boat.

Sorry that was a rant.

thank you boomers for dismantling straw men.

sorry, I didn't know I wasn't allowed to listen to the Slits anymore.

i think that to a 2010 teenager, both punks and hippies seem like ancient old farts fighting beefs that have no meaning to their lives. it's like the Jets vs. the Sharks as far as they're concerned. and they'd be right when you really think about it -- did we give a shit about beef b/w big bands and bebop?!?

Think I'm with the Teds

I actually think that big band vs bebop represents a more radical schism (in almost every way) than The Who or the Stones vs The Sex Pistols or The Clash.

rudimentary penii vs gordon lightfoot

I learned last night that both Chrissie Hynde and Mark Mothersbaugh were at the Kent State shootings.

The Cramps' "God Damn Rock 'N' Roll"

http://vimeo.com/10021229

the punk vs. classic rock schism is and has always been pretty much fake

Ermmm, yes and no. I can still remember bringing the soundtrack to "Urgh! A Music War" to a party in 1982, and having it pretty much forcibly replaced by Molly Hatchet.

maybe in a post-nirvana world? I remember hanging out with friends on a street corner around 1986, everybody in the neighborhood was pretty much a metalhead/classic rock fan. car pulls up and driver looks at me.

driver: "hey, are you that punk rocker?"
me: "yeah"
driver: "step in front of the car"

lol

i mean yeah teen cultural tribe-wise sure...but all the punks liked stuff the was classic rock and a lot of stuff that feels punk to me WAS classic rock

greg ginn was a deadhead

he was also a nerd! how many nerds per capita in classic rock?

there's that astrophysicist in queen and the nerdy half of cheap trick -- is that it?

dude there were tons of nerds!

i feel like boston are more gearheads than nerds if that's what you mean.

haha main boston dude is a total nerd, i bet he was a ham radio dude!

the creedence dudes are total nerds

the zombies

If anything, it's probably easier for kids to pitch turf wars over smaller differences. It's not that I see no distinction at all. It just doesn't seem at all comparable to the differences between big band (dominant American popular music form, tightly crafted large-ensemble arrangements built around pop melodies, even phrasing, improvised solos over the changes, ...) and bebop (something closer to an elite art music, small groups with much looser arrangements dominated by improvisation, asymmetrical phrasing, highly complex harmonies and melody-harmony relationships, faster tempi,...).

xposts

rudimentary penii vs gordon lightfoot

This is facetious, right? The bands I mentioned are epoch-defining canonical examples of the genres. You could just as easily set up a 'schism' between e.g Rudimentary Peni vs Elvis Costello or Black Sabbath vs Gordon Lightfoot.

Black Sabbath vs Gordon Lightfoot

Laguna Sundown

It just doesn't seem at all comparable to the differences between big band (dominant American popular music form, tightly crafted large-ensemble arrangements built around pop melodies, even phrasing, improvised solos over the changes, ...) and bebop (something closer to an elite art music, small groups with much looser arrangements dominated by improvisation, asymmetrical phrasing, highly complex harmonies and melody-harmony relationships, faster tempi,...).

rong imo

there was as much crossover between the big band and bebop aesthetics as there was/is between classic rock and punk

Really? Hm. Maybe I'm oversimplifying then.

Like, I see crossover but I do see more of a significant difference than between two varieties of riff-based pop songs played with g/b/v/d.

But I'm interested in hearing your perspective. Not an expert here per se.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtG5m7P56vk

there is punk rock that is possible to classify as following the classic rock tradition due to similarities in form/structure; likewise there is bebop that is possible to classify as following the big band tradition due to similarities in form/structure. I don't think it's easy to quantify the similarity of genres, but I don't see the constant of a g/b/v/d lineup being that incredibly limiting in terms of potential difference between two genres. I mean, bebop artists used the same instruments that big band artists used too..

I think in purely sociological terms punk was more nerd-friendly than classic rock, whatever their sonic similarities.

but there were always nerds, so what did they listen to?

plus like real nerds weren't even cool enuff to be punks, like D&D nerds and shit were all into rush and prog and metal

xposts to Curtis

It's not just the g/v/b/d lineup though. I think the instruments are used in relatively similar ways, when looking at the most influential or popularly successful examples: 4/4 time with a backbeat on 2 and 4 most of the time, power chords with distorted guitar timbres, shouting vocals, 4-bar phrasing, contrasting verse-chorus forms with a middle eight, an emphasis on live performance and studio recording over notated scores or charts -> None of these things would seem at all unusual in much of either post-British Invasion classic hard rock or in classic punk rock. The fact that Dizzy Gillespie led a big band does not by itself disprove to me that much of the most important and influential bebop did work with pretty different forms, harmonies, phrasing and sorts of ensembles than the majority of popular swing/big band. I also think that, in general terms, it moved jazz to a different place in terms of its cultural presence/popular appeal, more so than happened to rock music after punk rock.

Maybe I'm being obvious here and you're arguing against because of that, not sure.

And I do agree that it's not a quantifiable matter. This is just how I happen to see it.

this really should have been an option:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MP3amMtN3g4

I agree with Sundar. It was post-punk that broke from blues. Right? More or less. These are all generalities though.

I don't know, I don't really see how e.g. Joy Division's "Disorder" (or even "Death Disco") breaks away from the blues to a greater extent than, say, "Eleanor Rigby" or "Strawberry Fields Forever", "Stairway to Heaven" or something like Yes' "Heart of the Sunrise". If anything, "Eleanor Rigby" (or "God Only Knows") seems like the more radical break to me in dropping the backbeat (even the rock rhythm section) and moving the accents back to 1 and 3, besides the use of non-standard instrumentation. Given everything that had been achieved in rock by 1976, I'm not sure why punk/postpunk is a more radical break, at least in sonic or formal terms, than many of the other rock styles that had emerged by that point. (I also think it's hard to talk of a 'classic rock' tradition when rock and roll was only a little over 20 years old by that time and what we think of as classic rock was about a decade old.) I do think it's distinctive in cultural terms as a movement that directly presented, or at least marketed itself, in reaction to other, more mainstream forms of rock music, laying the groundwork for the concept of an "alternative rock music".

f anything, "Eleanor Rigby" (or "God Only Knows") seems like the more radical break to me in dropping the backbeat (even the rock rhythm section) and moving the accents back to 1 and 3, besides the use of non-standard instrumentation.

I mean, also things like the relatively more complex harmonies in "God Only Knows", the radical expansions of form in prog

Kept pondering this thread, and this was something that came up: <object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/O4o8TeqKhgY&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0";></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/O4o8TeqKhgY&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0"; type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4o8TeqKhgY