|
Register | Blogging | Today's Posts | Search |
View Poll Results: Who was better? | |||
The Ramones | 64,000 | 99.81% | |
The Clash | 121 | 0.19% | |
The Sex Pistols suck (aka, never listened to either) | 3 | 0.00% | |
Voters: 64124. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
07-24-2009, 11:38 AM | #151 (permalink) |
Music Addict
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 127
|
From a music quality standpoint the Clash are (imo) better than both the Sex Pistols or the Ramones. The Sex Pistols would win an "attitude" battle, and the Ramones seemed more "accessable" than the other two. A great book to read, if you are into the Clash, is "Redemption Song". Everything you could know about Joe Strummer, the Clash, and the whole "scene" going on back then. Great read.
|
07-24-2009, 11:45 AM | #152 (permalink) |
Music Addict
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 127
|
An additional thought, about the Clash, regarding the Sex Pistols. Joe Strummer, did not know which "direction" he wanted to go with the Clash (when they formed), until he saw the Sex Pistols. He was clearly impressed with the "performance" they did, and even if much is not thought of the Pistols, they really did influence other groups.
|
07-27-2009, 06:11 PM | #156 (permalink) |
Dr. Prunk
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Where the buffalo roam.
Posts: 12,137
|
I think Clash are better because even in the world of punk, a little variety doesn't hurt.
Ramones are still ace though. |
07-31-2009, 01:37 AM | #157 (permalink) | |
king of sex
Join Date: May 2009
Location: canada
Posts: 331
|
Quote:
....no way, the ramones formula is evident in pretty much every hardcore band that came out in the 80's. Power pop usually requires more chops anyway. ...I was just replying to the ramones following in the clashes footprint comment. Not only is this chronologically impossible...they're completely different bands. |
|
|