I didn't know where to put this, but I need music help. (pop, punk)

Urban Hat€monger ? · 11-26-2008, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tobias

Yeah I got it, you don't have to be an ass about it.

I wasn't being an ass , you asked a question so I answered it.

Alfred · 11-26-2008, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FaSho

I agree that it's more along the lines of "fake" punk then anything else, but IMO there are some legitamatley good skate-punk songs, but most of skate punk band's discographies as a whole are lacking.

I used to be into skate punk, but it gets very repetetive after a while (fast drumming, pop punk lyrics, and high pitched lead guitar). Now the only band that pleases me is Lagwagon, and I would most definitely say that they're a punk band, though they are quite poppy.

I think the best punk band of this day and age is Cancer Bats, though they're very metal-influenced.

FaSho · 11-26-2008, 01:48 PM

I still love Lagwagon as well, but I hardly get around to listening to them. Punk-wise I'm more into the more alt. punk bands like Dead Boys, X, and Suicide Machines. I might have to check out Cancer Bats.

**Janszoon** · 11-26-2008, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tobias

I'm not trying to argue...I'm trying to figure this out. Don't mistake my questions for instigations. Yes you got it, this thread is for suggestions to me so i can expand my taste.

And before this thread, all i've ever heard the word pop being referred to is the music that EVERYONE hates. Because they use it in this context, "Ugh that's so poppy"

Hell no! For example, the Beach Boys were pop and they totally kicked ass.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tobias

And I always thought that the Ramones were like the fathers of Punk, or at least that's what i've always been told. So calling them poppy seemed like a contradiction to me.

The Ramones were the fathers of punk, but their sound was also a throwback to early 60s pop rock. It went against the grain because that's not what pop music sounded like in 70s, but their music still definitely had a pop quality to it.

Veronica Lodge · 11-26-2008, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Janszoon

The Ramones were the fathers of punk, but their sound was also a throwback to early 60s pop rock. It went against the grain because that's not what pop music sounded like in 70s, but their music still definitely had a pop quality to it.

New York Dolls - 1971.

Urban Hat€monger ? · 11-26-2008, 02:26 PM

And the New York Dolls hardly sold any records until much later.

**Janszoon** · 11-26-2008, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Veronica Lodge

New York Dolls - 1971.

Yes, the New York Dolls, like the Stooges, the MC5, the Dictators and the Velvet Underground were a big influence on punk, though not really a part of it themselves.

Veronica Lodge · 11-26-2008, 02:28 PM

It's not about who SOLD more records. But they were playing punk rock music 3 years before the Ramone's even formed.

Some just need to get past the transvestite facade they had.

They were the original punk-rock.

No, friends, you need to check out some history books.

**Janszoon** · 11-26-2008, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Veronica Lodge

No, friends, you need to check out some history books.

Well, you're certainly entitled to your opinion, but the general consensus, in the history books as you say, is that they were not a punk band but rather a glam band or at most a protopunk band. And if you want to get into a who came first discussion, the Velvet Underground predate the New York Dolls by six years.

Urban Hat€monger ? · 11-26-2008, 02:37 PM

The New York Dolls weren't doing anything The Rolling Stones weren't doing already. Never heard anyone say they started punk though.

The Deviants were doing the whole 'punk rock' thing in 1966 / 67.
It didn't take off then , Why?
Because people weren't ready for it. They even had a whole scene behind them , the whole UK counter culture scene.

But they never got being above a cult band because they didn't sell any records , so yes sales DO have a lot to do with it.

Punk would have never taken off the way it did if the Pistols hadn't been top of the charts & been on prime time TV.

11-26-2008, 02:26 PM	#56 (permalink)
Urban Hat€monger ? The Sexual Intellectual Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Somewhere cooler than you Posts: 18,605	And the New York Dolls hardly sold any records until much later. __________________ Urb's RYM Stuff Most people sell their soul to the devil, but the devil sells his soul to Nick Cave.

11-26-2008, 02:28 PM	#58 (permalink)
Veronica Lodge Music Addict Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Riverdale. Posts: 174	It's not about who SOLD more records. But they were playing punk rock music 3 years before the Ramone's even formed. Some just need to get past the transvestite facade they had. They were the original punk-rock. No, friends, you need to check out some history books. __________________ - Veronica Lodge - Yes, that IS what I said.

11-26-2008, 02:37 PM	#60 (permalink)
Urban Hat€monger ? The Sexual Intellectual Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Somewhere cooler than you Posts: 18,605	The New York Dolls weren't doing anything The Rolling Stones weren't doing already. Never heard anyone say they started punk though. The Deviants were doing the whole 'punk rock' thing in 1966 / 67. It didn't take off then , Why? Because people weren't ready for it. They even had a whole scene behind them , the whole UK counter culture scene. But they never got being above a cult band because they didn't sell any records , so yes sales DO have a lot to do with it. Punk would have never taken off the way it did if the Pistols hadn't been top of the charts & been on prime time TV. __________________ Urb's RYM Stuff Most people sell their soul to the devil, but the devil sells his soul to Nick Cave.