Was modern music being written pre-1965? - Music Banter Music Banter

Go Back   Music Banter > The Music Forums > General Music
Register Blogging Today's Posts
Welcome to Music Banter Forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with over 70,000 other registered members. After you create your free account, you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 1,100,000 posts.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-12-2016, 08:17 PM   #11 (permalink)
...here to hear...
 
Lisnaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: He lives on Love Street
Posts: 4,444
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OccultHawk View Post
Link Wray is an entirely different tree. That's more like the roots of MC5. You're comparing beer funnels to gravity bongs.
^ Am I ? I thought that with its fuzzed up guitar Rumble was approaching what the OP was asking about:-

Quote:
Originally Posted by RJDG14 View Post
In this sense, rock music typical of the late 60s and 70s.
Still, I'm really ignorant about music theory. For instance he talks about "modern day chord progressions" which I wouldn't recognise if I tripped over them in the street.
__________________
"Am I enjoying this moment? I know of it and perhaps that is enough." - Sybille Bedford, 1953
Lisnaholic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2016, 06:41 AM   #12 (permalink)
one-balled nipple jockey
 
OccultHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Dirty Souf Biatch
Posts: 22,006
Default

Well the OP hasn't demonstrated the ability to articulate a clear question so I suppose your guess is as good as mine.
OccultHawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2016, 08:17 AM   #13 (permalink)
...here to hear...
 
Lisnaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: He lives on Love Street
Posts: 4,444
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OccultHawk View Post
Well the OP hasn't demonstrated the ability to articulate a clear question so I suppose your guess is as good as mine.
^ Haha! Thanks.

BTW, I've also had the pleasure of seeing Neil Young live, at a huge concert hall in London. Easily one of the best concerts I've seen, with NY playing an acoustic first half, at the piano for some songs like Sky About To Rain. Second half he blasted through his rock repertoire, including some songs -do you remember? - that Giffen complained about as not being proper NY material.
__________________
"Am I enjoying this moment? I know of it and perhaps that is enough." - Sybille Bedford, 1953
Lisnaholic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2016, 08:39 AM   #14 (permalink)
one-balled nipple jockey
 
OccultHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Dirty Souf Biatch
Posts: 22,006
Default

lol

I like Trans!
OccultHawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2016, 09:12 AM   #15 (permalink)
...here to hear...
 
Lisnaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: He lives on Love Street
Posts: 4,444
Default

^ Do you ? I prefer the early albums really. I secretly agree with Giffen; why couldn't he keep on making Everybody Knows... and After The Goldrush again and again?

I wonder if you have an opinion on Sedan Delivery? I' ve never heard it. Does the music do justice to the concept?
__________________
"Am I enjoying this moment? I know of it and perhaps that is enough." - Sybille Bedford, 1953
Lisnaholic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2016, 10:11 AM   #16 (permalink)
one-balled nipple jockey
 
OccultHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Dirty Souf Biatch
Posts: 22,006
Default

Why don't you just listen to it?

I guess Rust Never Sleeps is kind of like Blood on the Tracks in that at this point it's borderline blasphemy to say anything critical about it.

To answer your question, I don't think anything Young did after After... measures up except Cortez and Old Man and who knows maybe something I'm overlooking. But anyway, I'm with you. I figure the reason why he didn't keep creating Gold Rushes is because it simply wasn't in his head anymore.

Now when I say I like Trans I'm not saying it's a 5 Star masterpiece. I'm saying I understand that he liked to keep reaching out and building on new ideas as an artist and when I listen to Trans and his other stuff as well I enjoy it for what it is. In my opinion, it's better to enjoy Trans for what it is (a fun record) than to compare it with his other stuff. It's also easier to be forgiving when you weren't anticipating the release and expecting something else. With Sonic Youth I was very disappointed with Goo and Dirty because all I wanted was more Bad Moon Rising but now I look at their discography as a whole and enjoy it all.
OccultHawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2016, 01:03 PM   #17 (permalink)
Exo
All day jazz and biscuits
 
Exo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NJ
Posts: 7,354
Default

Everything written before 1965 was modern for that time. This is a very bad question.
__________________
LastFM

SUPREME POO BAH MODERATOR EXTRAORDINAIRE
Exo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2016, 01:05 PM   #18 (permalink)
SOPHIE FOREVER
 
Frownland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: East of the Southern North American West
Posts: 35,541
Default

I think the OP is asking how many artists wrote things before 1965, then released them after 1965.
__________________
Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth.

Frownland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2016, 10:54 PM   #19 (permalink)
carpe musicam
 
Neapolitan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Les Barricades Mystérieuses
Posts: 7,710
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MJD View Post
You really need to specify what you refer to as "modern music"!
I read Modern Classical ends around 1977. I forgot where I read this, but I wish I knew so I could cite it. That oddly enough coincides with the Disco/Punk movement. A year later NWOBHM starts in 1978, (at least according to wiki nwobhm article). Even AOR came into its own in the mid-70s. The OP compares Cortez to music from the 80s and 90s which would really be Post-Modern. That aside, I can totally relate to the OP.

TRAFFIC John Barleycorn Must Die


Having recently listened to and enjoyed Traffic's John Barelycorn Must Die (recorded February–April 1970), which has many similarities to more recent Acid Folk from the mid 00s. I chose to research the song on Wikipedia. It claims that the song was written in the sixteenth century, and that Robert Burns had a version in 1782. I don't see how it could have been written this early. Even in acoustic form, it still doesn't fit into the 16th to 18th century era, either lyrically or melodically.

So was there an underground scene in circa 16th to 18th century that was creating music like John Barelycorn, which had little or no outside exposure until later? If so, could you give some examples, or if not, what is some early 16 to 18th century folk music that has modern day chord progression (if there is any)?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by mord View Post
Actually, I like you a lot, Nea. That's why I treat you like ****. It's the MB way.

"it counts in our hearts" ?ºº?
“I have nothing to offer anybody, except my own confusion.” Jack Kerouac.
“If one listens to the wrong kind of music, he will become the wrong kind of person.” Aristotle.
"If you tried to give Rock and Roll another name, you might call it 'Chuck Berry'." John Lennon
"I look for ambiguity when I'm writing because life is ambiguous." Keith Richards
Neapolitan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2016, 02:14 PM   #20 (permalink)
Groupie
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 23
Default

at its heart, Cortez could be distilled down to about three or four chords, and structurally it's incredibly simple.

Young could have easily written the chords and lyrics and vocal melody as a complete beginner. All that crazy electric guitar stuff could have come much much later.
wrong note rod is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Similar Threads



© 2003-2024 Advameg, Inc.