Music Banter

Music Banter (https://www.musicbanter.com/)
-   Punk (https://www.musicbanter.com/punk/)
-   -   Is Progressive Punk really an oxymoron? (https://www.musicbanter.com/punk/86773-progressive-punk-really-oxymoron.html)

Ol’ Qwerty Bastard 08-13-2016 02:33 PM

Grime is good

William_the_Bloody 08-13-2016 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor (Post 1729634)
You're a mess of contradictions here

First it was "nobody cares about The Cure anymore"

Now it's they're not underground enough

Then you talk about Crustpunk, a subgenre of punk, as being a significant underground movement which validates my point that punk doesn't die but it takes many forms

Flies right in the face of your idea that punk was just Sex Pistols doesn't it?

Elphenor you are now mischaracterizing my own words. You lost the argument along time ago. Stop embarrassing yourself.

William_the_Bloody 08-13-2016 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor (Post 1729636)
I think you actually lost the argument to yourself bud

Good I'm glad you stopped. People can read it and decide for themselves.

The Batlord 08-13-2016 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor (Post 1729581)
Punk started in the U.S. that's the first clue that you just don't know dick about this

Sex Pistols imported it for the UK audience

If it wasn't for the Sex Pistols punk would have died cause nobody cared about CBGB's. It was a tiny scene with no real circuit of clubs that would have them and therefore no way to get any exposure until punk and new wave hit in Britain.

And Malcolm McLaren only imported the clothes. Both scenes were pretty much ignorant of how the other sounded when they were first developing.

Blank. 08-13-2016 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor (Post 1729639)
The thing is pop requires huge production budgets usually with massive teams, analytics on what will sell, charts and ghostwriters

Think of it more like a Hollywood movie

This was true for even the classic rock bands of the 70's

So you just missed the point completely.

Blank. 08-13-2016 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor (Post 1729647)
If you make pop because you like it and not to make money you end up with stuff like Ramones

No. You end up with a sound you like.

The Batlord 08-13-2016 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor (Post 1729642)
The first point doesn't contradict my point that it started in the U.S.

It doesn't matter if it started in the US, cause Britain is what made it a thing anyone cared about.

Quote:

Whether or not Johnny Rotten heard anything from CBGB is really hard to know, but I find it basically unbelievable that he wasn't into American Proto Punk
Have you actually listened to UK punk? It was by and large revved up pub rock until post-punk evolved, and New York was basically arty pop.

Blank. 08-13-2016 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor (Post 1729650)
The music you hear on the radio Top 40 pop

It cannot be made by a few people with no money

This tells me you have no idea what your talking about and are jumping to conclusions. Anyone who has any idea how to write a song know that most top 40 hits are extremely simplistic and easy to imitate. Most artists find it insulting the amount of money going into such a simple song.

Blank. 08-13-2016 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor (Post 1729663)
If you take the song by itself it doesn't chart though you understand.

often a record label simply will not invest in it until the artist allows for changes

Of course. But you're diverting away from my point that artists in all fields do whatever they want. It's not just punk and indie.

Blank. 08-13-2016 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor (Post 1729672)
There's quite a lot of involvement from the producers in pop music

Ok. You're missing the point. And this is pointless.

The Batlord 08-13-2016 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor (Post 1729680)
I'm not sure this is even true, but what people care about isn't important

People who are properly into Punk understand it started in the U.S.

There was a time where I thought post punk was a UK phenomenon but then I got into Pere Ubu and The Contortions and such

I mean, I fkin love UK punk don't get me wrong here

Yeah I listen to those bands too, and Pere Ubu are one of, like what, two bands to come out of that scene with any amount of notice? Them and Devo? And no, I don't count the Dead Boys because they're garbage.

And the Contortions were part of a scene nobody probably had any idea about before the internet cause it was so short-lived and unpalatable to pretty much everybody.

Nobody cared about Pere Ubu or the Contortions or Lydia Lunch or whoever, except for a small handful of arty music fans. They launched no movements. The Sex Pistols did. So you can take your No True Scotsman fallacy and cram it. "Properly into punk" is the kind of elitist bull**** that punk either despises or reveres, I'm not sure which.

P.S. You forgot Australia. Can't be a proper snob without name dropping the Saints and Radio Birdman.

The Batlord 08-13-2016 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor (Post 1729691)
I made a statement of historical fact

You then say "the public didn't know about it though"

My response: who cares?

If I'm gonna talk about Australia I'm repping Birthday Party and don't even get me started on New Zealand

But that's the point. Punk didn't really start anywhere. It was a series of tenuously, at best, connected scenes that were all jiving on Iggy Pop and Velvet Underground. If an American scene had the first band then that's really just a technicality, cause the whole **** show that was the punk movement started in Britain.

William_the_Bloody 08-13-2016 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord (Post 1729692)
But that's the point. Punk didn't really start anywhere. It was a series of tenuously, at best, connected scenes that were all jiving on Iggy Pop and Velvet Underground. If an American scene had the first band then that's really just a technicality, cause the whole **** show that was the punk movement started in Britain.

Lol, your wasting your time with elphenor Batlord, she's not the brightest light in the tool shed. You could argue with her all night and she'll just keep changing the goal posts.

The New York scene would have been confined to the historic dustbins of obscurity if it wasn't for the London punk explosion, and the term punk was not widely used to describe music until Caroline Coon applied it to the British punk scene, and the media ran with it.

Punk is dead and I'm happy it is, because when musical genres stick around to long they begin to suck!!!

I'd jump back into this argument, but I've got better things to do than argue with someone who romanticizes a 40 year old musical genre in 2016. life is short.

Blank. 08-14-2016 12:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor (Post 1729827)
The vast majority of punk is obscure

The vast majority of bands in almost every genre are obscure.

Quote:

Punk was being used to describe American bands well before the UK scene
(All you have to do is run a Google search to find this out like good god guys)
No one is arguing against this. Punk Rock and it's attitude has to have roots somewhere. It doesn't just pop up out of nowhere.

Quote:

And there's no evidence to suggest that Sex Pistols made Ramones and Television more popular than they were
Point is?

Quote:

We better tell all the Crustpunks to pack it up and go home seeing as William has declared punk already dead.
Punk is dead. It's Alive in small pockets, like every music scene, but mostly dead.

William_the_Bloody 08-14-2016 12:19 AM

Ok elphenor we'll let you live in your own little reality.

Anyone who wants to read my argument can just scroll back.

Blank. 08-14-2016 12:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor (Post 1729853)
yes they were

That's literally what the last page is about

No. People were denying that CBGB was punk. They weren't denying that punk had roots in CBGB.

William_the_Bloody 08-14-2016 12:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor (Post 1729854)
didnt you already say you weren't going to argue anymore

Looks like you came back for more punishment


you're a pro at contradicting yourself

People can go back and read my argument we will let you live in your own little world.

The Batlord 08-14-2016 03:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor (Post 1729853)
yes they were

That's literally what the last page is about

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1blankmind (Post 1729856)
No. People were denying that CBGB was punk. They weren't denying that punk had roots in CBGB.

No, I was arguing that without the British scene all the other scenes would have fizzled out due to the lack of audience that only existed because of it. Whether or not those bands went platinum is another matter.

Dylstew 08-14-2016 12:50 PM

I still can't believe elphenor believes punk doesn't have a sound.

Blank. 08-14-2016 12:51 PM

It's becoming a pointless argument.

The Batlord 08-14-2016 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dylstew (Post 1729999)
I still can't believe elphenor believes punk doesn't have a sound.

She's a mindless elitist who's taken the idea of claiming that the Kinks invented punk to its logical and annoying conclusion.

The Batlord 08-15-2016 03:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor (Post 1730336)
The irony in this is look at the title of this thread you made

Yes "progressive punk" is a thing because punk doesn't have hard genre rules.

It's about as much as a sound as "experimental rock" is a sound

Punk is more defined by its philosophies than its sounds

If punk doesn't have hard genre rules then wouldn't progressive punk just be punk?


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:39 AM.


© 2003-2025 Advameg, Inc.