Jump to content
Why become a member? ×
Support your local Basschat

Is Keef right, Sgt Peppers is a load of tosh?

PaulWarning

By PaulWarning,
in General Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

PaulWarning Veteran

PaulWarning

Posted
  • Author
Posted

[quote name='Annoying Twit' timestamp='1439630008' post='2844486']
IMHO there are tons of influential artists, but you probably aren't aware of who is being influenced. Going back a bit, but look at how influential rap bands such as De La Soul, NWA, etc. were. Dance music pioneers such as Aphex Twin. They defined the sound of a large part of popular music for everyone. I'm sure there are similar bands/musicians now who are hugely influential on other artists, but I don't know who they are. Skrillex?
[/quote]I take your point about rap, but it took off in the 80's, I'm no expert but it does not seem to have moved on to another level since then, but yeah I'm sure there are young bands who have been influenced by bands from the noughties, just remembered the Artic Monkeys, they've been influential I guess

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Annoying Twit Proficient

Annoying Twit

Posted
Posted (edited)

[quote name='PaulWarning' timestamp='1439631285' post='2844500']
I take your point about rap, but it took off in the 80's, I'm no expert but it does not seem to have moved on to another level since then, but yeah I'm sure there are young bands who have been influenced by bands from the noughties, just remembered the Artic Monkeys, they've been influential I guess
[/quote]

Rap I can talk about a bit as I know it. While it took off in the 80s, it was still developing considerably at the time of the artists/albums I mentioned. De La Soul's 3 Feet High and Rising, which came out in 1989, as it was innovative and highly influential. For any musical genre, there are huge numbers of people who claim to have invented it (same for the music video), but NWA's 1988 track and album "Straight Outta Compton" was hugely influential in establishing and defining gangsta rap. I used those examples as I was familiar with them, and they post-dated your example dates of the 50s/60s/70s.

I'm sure that there are artists who were/are innovative and influential in the 90s/00s/and 10s. However, this may not apply to every genre. There's nothing wrong with the Arctic Monkeys, but they aren't very innovative. Much of their music could have been released in the 1980s and nobody would have really noticed anything unusual. Possibly what is happening is that you aren't listening to the genres where real innovation is happening, and therefore aren't aware where the significantly innovative music is being released. I'm sure that the same applies to me, and I'm hoping that someone younger can provide later examples. I wildly guessed at Skrillex. I'm sure there are teenagers around the county having their mind blown by some current artist(s), and wanting to create music like that. But, that's not me.

While I don't know who the real current innovators are, I don't think this is any evidence that there aren't any. (Such would be an argument from ignorance). Just that I'm out of touch. And of course, there must be innovators, or we wouldn't have new genres of music.

EDIT: 90s, Nirvana! Hugely influential, even today. How could I have forgotten.

Someone like The White Stripes have been influential, but I don't think they have been as innovative as others. There is an awful lot of their stripped down modern blues around today, however.

EDIT: Skrillex invented dubstep, it says here. [url="http://www.theuntz.com/news/greatest-dubstep-artists-of-all-time-top-10/"]http://www.theuntz.c...ll-time-top-10/[/url] But, he's only #6 on this list of the greatest dubstep artists of all time? Skream & Benga - I've never heard of them. But, the following indicates innovation and influence.

[quote]
Skream & Benga are by all means innovators and game-changers, and undoubtedly appear on page one of the dubstep history books. These British electronic producers gave dubstep that spice and pizzazz it truly needed to draw a more diverse audience, leaving listener’s spellbound with their futuristic take on wobbly tunes. Whether producing together as two-thirds of Magnetic Man or embarking on solo missions, it goes without saying they qualify for legen…wait for it…dary status.
[/quote]

Edited by Annoying Twit
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Slipperydick Enthusiast

Slipperydick

Posted
Posted

[quote name='Rich' timestamp='1439628739' post='2844467']
[b][i]inspire me to pick up a bass,[/i][/b] [b][i]so I guess if you follow that line back you could say that my ultimate influences are the original Jamaican ska bassists from the 60s,[/i][/b] and later reggae (I'm sure Family Man will have been in there somewhere too). Not a Beatle in sight there if you ask me.
[/quote]

Me too. I listened to Chuck and Little Richard, Stones - yep, some beatles even. But later, when I worked in Winson Green and heard all that Prince Buster and Blue Beat, I knew I wanted to play it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Happy Jack Grand Master

Happy Jack

Posted
Posted

Getting back OT, I'm appalled at the notion that anyone could have been influenced by Roger Moore in a Lotus.

The only possible candidate would be Sean Connery in an Aston Martin DB5.

Now that led to Roger Moore in a Volvo (The Saint), a far more acceptable combination.

Just don't get me started on Lord Peter Wimsey ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Slipperydick Enthusiast

Slipperydick

Posted
Posted

[quote name='Happy Jack' timestamp='1439633592' post='2844521']
Getting back OT, I'm appalled at the notion that anyone could have been influenced by Roger Moore in a Lotus.

The only possible candidate would be Sean Connery in an Aston Martin DB5.

Now that led to Roger Moore in a Volvo (The Saint), a far more acceptable combination.

Just don't get me started on Lord Peter Wimsey ...
[/quote]

Naah ! No.6 in his Lotus7. The only way to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PaulWarning Veteran

PaulWarning

Posted
  • Author
Posted

[quote name='Annoying Twit' timestamp='1439632602' post='2844511']


EDIT: 90s, Nirvana! Hugely influential, even today. How could I have forgotten.

Someone like The White Stripes have been influential, but I don't think they have been as innovative as others. There is an awful lot of their stripped down modern blues around today, however.


[/quote]Yep Nirvana were influential, they in turn were influenced hugely by Punk, White Stripes were influential after there first couple of Albums, showed you didn't need a bass, bastards

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Billy Apple Mentor

Billy Apple

Posted
Posted (edited)

[quote name='Happy Jack' timestamp='1439633592' post='2844521']
I'm appalled at the notion that anyone could have been influenced by Roger Moore in a Lotus.
[/quote]

It was 1977 and I was 10. As Lemmy would say, the sight of a well turned ankle would send me into paroxysms of joy.

Edited by Billy Apple
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rich Grand Master

Rich

Posted
Posted

[quote name='Happy Jack' timestamp='1439633592' post='2844521']
Now that led to Roger Moore in a Volvo (The Saint), a far more acceptable combination.
[/quote]
Nonsense.
Lord Brett Sinclair in that mustard yellow Aston DBS, now THAT's more like it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
blue Mentor

blue

Posted
Posted

[quote name='ezbass' timestamp='1439625411' post='2844415']
Or: Les Paul, Chet Atkins, Elvis, Scotty Moore, Eddie Cochran, Muddy Waters, The Shadows, the previously mentioned Buddy Holly...the list goes on.
[/quote]

True, however outside of The Shadows the others were solo artists for the most part. And The Beatles hit a much larger audience in a relatively short period of time.

Blue

Link to comment
Share on other sites
blue Mentor

blue

Posted
Posted

[quote name='Annoying Twit' timestamp='1439619463' post='2844378']
I think that after a few generations many people have forgotten the importance of musical innovation, and just evaluate the music with the ears of someone from 2015. And if the innovation has been influential and lasting, then the music will sound more ordinary. E.g. anyone who thinks that The Beatles were incredibly influential then should accept that Buddy Holly and the Crickets were also very influential, as they influenced The Beatles. (Even to the point of The Beatles being a The Crickets me-too band name, but with the spelling change).
[/quote]

Well yeah, I knew at an early age John and Paul were influenced by Buddy. But to what degree? Do any of you real historians have any examples or references?

Funny, I was 8 or 9 years old, 1963 living in southern Spain. I was shooting marbles ( and I had some really good ones ) and these 2 women were hanging out laundry to dry and I heard them talking about The Beatles. I didn't know what they were talking about, but within the next few weeks I was in a department store with my Dad and walked out with [i]"Meet The Beatles"[/i] and Manfred Mann's[i] "Do Wah Diddy." [/i]My life had changed.

Blue

Link to comment
Share on other sites
molan Veteran

molan

Posted
Posted (edited)

[quote name='Marvin' timestamp='1439678630' post='2845002']


It only took 6 pages but there's your answer. :)
[/quote]

and I didn't read any of those 6 pages.

When it comes down to it Keef was just 'right'.

Any other view is simply 'wrong'. . .

Edited by molan
Link to comment
Share on other sites
EssentialTension Grand Master

EssentialTension

Posted
Posted

[quote name='blue' timestamp='1439676271' post='2844975'] Well yeah, I knew at an early age John and Paul were influenced by Buddy. But to what degree? Do any of you real historians have any examples or references? [/quote]

Try this to get you started ...

[url="http://www.aaronkrerowicz.com/beatles-blog/the-influence-of-buddy-holly-on-the-beatles"]The Influence of Buddy Holly on the Beatles[/url]

Link to comment
Share on other sites
skankdelvar Grand Master

skankdelvar

Posted
Posted (edited)

Seems to me certain posters are taking Mr Blue's position [i]vis a vis[/i] Pepper and young people far too seriously. To find evidence of a 'bad attitude' or to attribute a definitive 'rightness' or 'wrongness' to such insubstantial matters is to miss the crucial point.

Which is that Keith Richards is universally correct about [i]everything[/i] yet can simultaneously be wrong about [i]something. [/i]

For decades contradictions of this nature have excited physicists on the grounds that one such anomaly might be harnessed to provide infinite amounts of clean power, this to the greater benefit of mankind. To cavil and snipe around the issue is merely to stand in the way of a brighter future for humanity.

I hope these naysayers can live with themselves when they see pictures of the wee, starving tots who might have been saved by the Richards' Paradox had the matter not been occluded by petty issues of personal animus. Have we no shame? :(

Edited by skankdelvar
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...