Music Banter - Attempt to get me into post-punk.

Music Banter (https://www.musicbanter.com/)

- Punk (https://www.musicbanter.com/punk/)

- - Attempt to get me into post-punk. (https://www.musicbanter.com/punk/91159-attempt-get-me-into-post-punk.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by rubber soul (Post 1919400)

You make it sound like noise rock is a liability or something. It is a well respected sub-genre and I'm not the first one to refer to the Fall as noise rock. They also happen to be freaking good.

You labeled them as noise rock and then MES died. Concidence? I think not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rubber soul (Post 1919808)

It was the marketing tool. Radio stations used the term to separate bands like Blondie and Talking Heads to the likes of, say, Foreigner or the Bee Gees. It seemed like a softer way of saying punk rock to make it more palatable to the consumer. Some of it wasn't even New Wave. Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers were considered New Wave for example. It worked for a few groups (Blondie wasn't that big commercially speaking until Parallel Lines), but for others, it was kind of a disaster. It's possible the Post Punk description that was big in the early eighties was a reaction to the New Wave hype. There was also something called Post Wave which would have included bands like New Order for example.

heh, so that's probably why they called it ''No Wave''

Quote:

Originally Posted by rubber soul (Post 1919797)

For someone who was around during 'new wave'. It was basically a term used to make punk sound more commercial. Blondie especially had the new wave tag pinned on them. It would also be the label from more danceable bands like the B-52s. It eventually got so out of hand as by 1980 it had become so trendy that more traditional bands would cash in on the term. Alice Cooper even had one of his biggest hits that year with the 'New Wave' Clones. Shockingly enough, it's actually pretty good.

True punk bands though cringed at the suggestion they were New Wave. I could imagine John Lydon throwing up at the term even now.

The problem is that punk bands said that they weren't rock bands, even though they used the same old **** - Chuck Berry chords and rebellious lyrics. That in itself is all marketing bs, and why I don't see much difference in post-punk and new wave. In fact, I see it as the new wave started popularizing punk and then punk musicians decided they wanted to do the same thing and still pretend that they were real punks. Not saying I don't love some of that music, but there really isn't much difference other than I'd say that post-punk bands tended to be more independent and have more creative control as a result.

Basically, Duran Duran is new wave, The Smiths are post-punk.

Listened to a bit of:
Public Image Limited - First Issue
The Pop Group - Y

The first started out promising and then bored the **** out of my by going nowhere. The second though.. I genuinely dig this. I don't think I would have digged this two years ago but here I am.

PiL goes everywhere. You need to try harder.

How about some Bauhaus?

The Monochrome Set - Jet Set Junta

Suburban Lawns - Janitor

I totally forgot about The Birthday Party - they sort of remind me of NoMeansNo here, but less heavy and less precise. Also, they were Nick Cave's original group from before The Bad Seeds.

I'm pretty sure the Ramones considered themselves a rejection of rock or something stupid like that, I could be totally wrong, but they recorded a bunch of songs with distorted Chuck Berry riffs. I agree that punk is the ethos and style, but it's pretty much just marketing **** to teenagers like music has always done. As I get older, I tend to distance myself from the confines of "sub-genres" because that's really all it's about is marketing.

Nah. There are definitely some that began as or became marketing terms, but subgenres are usually coined by music nerds themselves.