"Helter Skelter" - more anticipatory of heavy metal or punk rock?

[Buried Alien]

Yes, another Beatles-related thread. Stop griping.

"Helter Skelter" anticipated harder rocking sounds that would fully blossom in the 1970s and beyond. In guitar-based rock, heavy metal and punk were the two hardest, harshest subgenres of rock to develop in the post-Beatles era. To hear metal and punk fans tell it, however, the two styles, despite their comment penchant for loud and fast guitars, are diametrically opposed to each other. Heavy metal values instrumental virtuosity while punk rock disdains it. Both, however, value harsh electric guitar sounds...which "Helter Skelter" had in abundance.

So was "Helter Skelter" more similar to heavy metal or punk rock?

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[Adam Crocker]

Hmm, I'm going to say "metal" simply because of the heavy sound of the guitars seems to fit more within late 60s proto-metal blues rock ala Blue Cheer or the Jimi Hendrix Experience. If there was a Beatles song was close to punk, it would be the single version of "Revolution" with its incendiary Chuck Berry intro and garagey guitar fuzz. This as opposed to the bloozy sludge of "Helter Skelter" seems to anticipate Black Sabbath more than the Ramones. Generally punk songs, while having harsh guitar sounds, tend to sound less heavy than metal, which I guess is part due to the speed of its delivery and the lack of the same downtuning.

(Does this mean that "Taxman" is anticipatory of post-punk, with it's staccato, slashing guitar lines; pronounced, wobbly bass; and the detached vocals with which the lyrics are sung, enhancing over-arching paranoia? The song just sounds more and more gnarled each time I listen to it.)

To hear metal and punk fans tell it, however, the two styles, despite their comment penchant for loud and fast guitars, are diametrically opposed to each other. Heavy metal values instrumental virtuosity while punk rock disdains it.

Which is actually kind of funny, because I find Blue Cheer fairly punk themselves given how harsh and primitive their music could be. The band didn't quite have the fancy fretwork for Cream or the Jimi Hendrix Experience and their rendition of "Summertime Blues," with its furious pace and vehement delivery on top that, sounds as proto punk as any of the toughest garage rock.

By the same right there are many aspects of the Stooges and Kick Out the Jams era MC5 that seem to anticipate metal. Both bands, much like Cream, Sabbath, and Blue Cheer were influenced by the noise experiments of the Who and the Yarbdirds. Moreover, they were both influenced by Hendrix's feedback laden sound and consequently their guitar sound could be Sabbath-like, especially Ron Asheton's. I remember reading somewhere that Rolling Stone yearbook or some other publication by the magazine in 1974 of 1975 identified the Stooges as heavy metal (while the VU were lumped in with art rock). Of course these bands were pre-metal and pre-punk, but its intersting to see how the lines blurred before things set in.

(And that's ignoring the various artistic links between punk and metal among various bands in the 70s, that only become more pronounced in the 1980s.)

Yes, another Beatles-related thread. Stop griping.


No! YOU CAN'T MAKE ME!!!

[howyadoin]

So was "Helter Skelter" more similar to heavy metal or punk rock?I'd say punk. But "I Want You (She's So Heavy)" is more metalish.

[Buried Alien]

But "I Want You (She's So Heavy)" is more metalish.

I agree with that, if only because "I Want You (She's So Heavy)" is so bluesy, and metal derives much more directly from blues than punk does.


Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[howyadoin]

I agree with that, if only because "I Want You (She's So Heavy)" is so bluesy, and metal derives much more directly from blues than punk does.I wouldn't have given it much thought one way or the other, except that back when James Hetfield was still cool, he was talking in an interview about hearing that song for the first time and being impressed by its heaviness.

[drnocturne2]

I'm going to risk injuring my balls by straddling the fence and saying both. As metal got more commercialized and mainstream, there would have to be an inevitable counter-culture backlash.

[Ilash]

Helter Skelter is a proto-metal song, as far as I'm concerned. It's much too blues-influenced to be punk-like, especially when you hear the original version of it on Anthology 3, which is pretty much a straight blues song. Revolution is closer to punk-rock but mainly because of its lyrics (though its screeching guitar tone could be seen as punk-rockish too, I suppose) but I still think it's more straight out hard rock than anything. As for I Want You (She's So Heavy), I see that as a straight out blues-rock song, especially because of the bluesy feel of the guitars.

As for the whole heavy metal vs punk thing, I do think they are really rather similar to one another. The argument that metal used more vituoso musicianship strikes me as being a bit odd when you consider that Black Sabbath's playing, the founders of the genre, were anything but virtuostic (I don't know if that's a real word but whatever). Yes, later on with the whole 80s scene there was a lot more guitar wanking in metal but I think the main difference is that punk was more musically simplistic and to the point (think Iron Man or Paranoid vs Blitskrieg Pop or Beat on the Brat). Also, while thrash may have been faster than punk, 70s metal was much slower and POUNDING than punk was. Also, lyrically the two did have nothing to do with one another at all.

[Adam Crocker]

Revolution is closer to punk-rock but mainly because of its lyrics (though its screeching guitar tone could be seen as punk-rockish too, I suppose) but I still think it's more straight out hard rock than anything.

The lyrics? I was thinking more the guitar. The optimism that underpine the lyrics and vocals don't strike me as all that punk rock which tends to be more discontented in its worldview. In that "My Generation" and "Satisfaction" are closer to punk lyrically speaking (or to actually cite a Beatles song "Taxman").

As for the whole heavy metal vs punk thing, I do think they are really rather similar to one another. The argument that metal used more vituoso musicianship strikes me as being a bit odd when you consider that Black Sabbath's playing, the founders of the genre, were anything but virtuostic (I don't know if that's a real word but whatever).

Well remember, that in the 1970s including around the time punk came to the fore, the term "heavy metal" was regularly used to refer to bands like Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple, Blue Öyster Cult, and Thin Lizzy. (Don't know how much this is the case now.) And this division persisted even into the 80s and beyond. (Even as speed and thrash metal drew from hardcore punk and hardcore from speed and thrash.) In fact AC/DC was originally viewed as some sort of Austrailian punk band because their music was so stripped down compared to prevailing 70s hard rock trends.

[Ilash]

The lyrics? I was thinking more the guitar. The optimism that underpine the lyrics and vocals don't strike me as all that punk rock which tends to be more discontented in its worldview. In that "My Generation" and "Satisfaction" are closer to punk lyrically speaking (or to actually cite a Beatles song "Taxman").



Er, good point actually. I just equated the political side of Revolution to punk but yeah, those other songs you brought are definitely closer.


Well remember, that in the 1970s including around the time punk came to the fore, the term "heavy metal" was regularly used to refer to bands like Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple, Blue Öyster Cult, and Thin Lizzy. (Don't know how much this is the case now.) And this division persisted even into the 80s and beyond. (Even as speed and thrash metal drew from hardcore punk and hardcore from speed and thrash.) In fact AC/DC was originally viewed as some sort of Austrailian punk band because their music was so stripped down compared to prevailing 70s hard rock trends.

Yeah, I know that but I actually thought that most people these days (including the members of the board) consider all of those bands you mentioned hard rock bands at most. A fair point otherwise though. AC/DC, punk? Yeah, can't really see it myself though it is hard to say why not. I could point out AC/DC's levity in comparison to most punk bands but then what about the Ramones.

Man, these genre definitions make my head hurt.

[Hiromi]

As for the whole heavy metal vs punk thing, I do think they are really rather similar to one another. The argument that metal used more vituoso musicianship strikes me as being a bit odd when you consider that Black Sabbath's playing, the founders of the genre, were anything but virtuostic (I don't know if that's a real word but whatever).

It is, you're just mispelling it. virtuosic.

"A musician with masterly ability, technique, or personal style." - Dictionary.com

Under that definition Tony Iommi, Eddie Van Halen, Dave L. Roth, Randy Rhoads, and quite a few other Metal artists from the early 70s and 80s were just as virtuosic as any rocker from the 60s.

Yes, later on with the whole 80s scene there was a lot more guitar wanking in metal but I think the main difference is that punk was more musically simplistic and to the point (think Iron Man or Paranoid vs Blitskrieg Pop or Beat on the Brat).

...Please refrain from brushing the entire label as "Guitar Wanking," as it really paints you as ignorant on it. Not everyone is Yngwie Malmsteen.

[Ilash]

...Please refrain from brushing the entire label as "Guitar Wanking," as it really paints you as ignorant on it. Not everyone is Yngwie Malmsteen.

Heh. Yeah, I know. Honestly, I'm hardly much of a punk lover and much of the music I listen to uses guitar solos to great effect. Metal does too of coure, I was just pointing out some of the more embarrasing examples of this.

[JeffreyWKramer]

I dunno what to think about "Helter Skelter", though I personally dislike that song, but I will note that some people have referred to "While My Guitar Gently Weeps" as possibly the first heavy metal song.

[Shellhead]

I dunno what to think about "Helter Skelter", though I personally dislike that song, but I will note that some people have referred to "While My Guitar Gently Weeps" as possibly the first heavy metal song.

Hunh. "While My Guitar Gently Weeps" was a distinctive song, but I can't see the heavy metal angle. Maybe proto-emo?

[JeffreyWKramer]

Hunh. "While My Guitar Gently Weeps" was a distinctive song, but I can't see the heavy metal angle. Maybe proto-emo?

It took guitar solos in a new direction, one which pointed the way, sound-wise, to proto-metal bands like Deep Purple.

[elheffe]

I think that "Everybody's Got Something To Hide Except Me And My Monkey" has the chops to be a punk song.

[Adam Crocker]

Hunh. "While My Guitar Gently Weeps" was a distinctive song, but I can't see the heavy metal angle. Maybe proto-emo?

Proto-emo?

And I can see the heavy metal angle to the song quite easily. I'm not sure what's hard to see. Heavy, distorted blues based guitar soloing.

[leonaozaki]

Both, however, value harsh electric guitar sounds...which "Helter Skelter" had in abundance.

So was "Helter Skelter" more similar to heavy metal or punk rock?

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

Metal. The punks drew from different sources (50's rock, Krautrock, the Who [My Generation, yes, but also I Can't Explain] and the Kinks).

And can we quibble with the basic premise? I know we had a similar thread about "Helter, Skelter" pre-crisis, and I spent a lot of time arguing that "Helter, Skelter" was not the first song to use harsh electric guitar sounds. ARE YOU EXPERIENCED? came out in 1967, as did Buffalo Springfield's "Mr. Soul," as well as Cream's DISRAELI GEARS. While we're on the subject, I would argue that Clapton's reworking of "Crossroads" had just as much impact on metal as did "Helter, Skelter."

Moreover, the classicists on the board may not like to talk about them, but the VU's first two albums both arrived in 1967, and they had just as much impact on punk as anything the Beatles did.

rob

[JeffreyWKramer]

Moreover, the classicists on the board may not like to talk about them, but the VU's first two albums both arrived in 1967, and they had just as much impact on punk as anything the Beatles did.

Who doesn't like to talk about the VU?

[Shellhead]

Proto-emo?

And I can see the heavy metal angle to the song quite easily. I'm not sure what's hard to see. Heavy, distorted blues based guitar soloing.

I admit that I made up the term proto-emo to cover for my lack of better reference points, but the overwrought passionate whining of the song does remind me of emo. I completely concede the point about the distorted blues guitar sharing a common ancestor with heavy metal, but I remember my days as a metal fan, and nobody in that scene would have admitted liking this particular Beatles song.

[Ilash]

Metal. The punks drew from different sources (50's rock, Krautrock, the Who [My Generation, yes, but also I Can't Explain] and the Kinks).

And can we quibble with the basic premise? I know we had a similar thread about "Helter, Skelter" pre-crisis, and I spent a lot of time arguing that "Helter, Skelter" was not the first song to use harsh electric guitar sounds. ARE YOU EXPERIENCED? came out in 1967, as did Buffalo Springfield's "Mr. Soul," as well as Cream's DISRAELI GEARS. While we're on the subject, I would argue that Clapton's reworking of "Crossroads" had just as much impact on metal as did "Helter, Skelter."



Though harsh electric guitar sounds were indeed around long before (well, a few months but this is teh explosive 60s we're talking about here) Helter Skelter. However, most of the examples you brought were very much blues-based while the sheer sonic onslaught of Helter Skelter had not been heard of yet in rock and roll, to my knowledge.


Moreover, the classicists on the board may not like to talk about them, but the VU's first two albums both arrived in 1967, and they had just as much impact on punk as anything the Beatles did.
rob

Yeah, like I would deny that! On the other hand, I don't know if they had the same kind of influence that Helter Skelter did. I haven't heard enough VU to say for sure but I was under the impression that their use of distortion, though innovative was fairly lumbering and slow in comparison to Helter Skelter's thrash-like speed. Am I wrong?

[JeffreyWKramer]

On the other hand, I don't know if they had the same kind of influence that Helter Skelter did.

You're 100% wrong. Some aspects of "Helter Skelter" may have caught aspects of the punk sound, but the VU's music completely caught the punk aesthetic, which was much more what punk was about. Ideologically, there can be no serious doubt that the primary influence. Soundwise, if you think the Beatles' use of feedback and speed was revolutionary compared to the VU, you've clearly never listened to "Heroin", "Black Angel's Death Song", "European Son" "Sister Ray" or "White Light, White Heat".

Really, Ilash, your fanaticism regarding the Beatles (possibly coupled with ignorance about a lot of other bands) renders you somewhat clueless about some things. They were the greatest rock band in history, and their body of work is arguably the high mark of 20th century music, but that doesn't mean they were the be-all and end-all of everything.

[Ilash]

You're 100% wrong. Some aspects of "Helter Skelter" may have caught aspects of the punk sound, but the VU's music completely caught the punk aesthetic, which was much more what punk was about. Ideologically, there can be no serious doubt that the primary influence. Soundwise, if you think the Beatles' use of feedback and speed was revolutionary compared to the VU, you've clearly never listened to "Heroin", "Black Angel's Death Song", "European Son" "Sister Ray" or "White Light, White Heat".

Really, Ilash, your fanaticism regarding the Beatles (possibly coupled with ignorance about a lot of other bands) renders you somewhat clueless about some things. They were the greatest rock band in history, and their body of work is arguably the high mark of 20th century music, but that doesn't mean they were the be-all and end-all of everything.

Um, actually when I asked "Am I wrong?", I was not being rhetoric. I would actually be the first person to admit that the Beatles were certainly not the be all and end all of everything and many of the revolutions and innovations done in rock and roll had zilch to do with them. However, I was under the impression that the VU's music was somewhat "sleepy" even at its most distorted and as such would not be able to match Helter Skelter's sheer speedy verocity. I in NO WAY believe that the Beatles played a bigger role in the development of punk than the VU but I thought that in this area at least, they might have. I was wrong. That's fine, I knew that could well be the case seeing as how my exposure to the VU has been limited to their more normal stuff and my argument was based on hearsay because of my reluctance to buy their albums (and the difficulty in finding them) specifically because these sonix experiments aren't really my cup of tea. I am, however, now downloading Heroin because a) I admit that my lack of knowledge in this department is a fairly big hole in my musical development so I want to see what I'm missing and b) to see if I might actually want to hunt down these albums because I do like their normal stuff somewhat. And yes, I know that I do have some ignorance about quite a few bands but I am constantly working on it and I doubt that my musical (at least within rock and pop music, I don't give a damn about hip hop) ignorance is really that much worse than anyone else's.

[Jonathan Bogart]

Though harsh electric guitar sounds were indeed around long before (well, a few months but this is teh explosive 60s we're talking about here) Helter Skelter. However, most of the examples you brought were very much blues-based while the sheer sonic onslaught of Helter Skelter had not been heard of yet in rock and roll, to my knowledge.
Actually, "Helter Skelter," according to McCartney, was an attempt to beat the Who at their own game, at a time when the Who was still destroying their instruments (while plugged in) at every show. "Sheer sonic onslaught"? The Who's 60's work might sound tame now, but it's a mistake to think that the studio work is all there was.

And on "My Guitar Gently Weeps": that was Eric Clapton doing the guitar solo, anyway, so Cream would be a better starting point for that argument. (But I think Harrison's chunky rhythm on that song can be considered proto-metal riffage. Judas Priest certainly never would have existed without it.)

Crocker is right in that punk and heavy metal were the same thing (sonically, anyway) in the underground in rock & roll during the late 60's. Not until Black Sabbath became the rallying point for heavy metal did the difference in speed become an issue; at that point, metal became more of a suburban phenomenon (the cover of Black Sabbath's first album is a creepy version of British suburbia) while punk was much more of an urban one (even localized in three specific cities: Detroit, New York, and later London).

And later, what was grunge but putting the metal back in punk? Iggy Pop was surprised and a little disconcerted when Sonic Youth played "We Will Fall" (he didn't think anyone wanted to listen to it, let alone cover it), but the wall-of-noise feedbackery that Sonic Youth (among others) make a key component of 80s indie (and thus helped launch Nirvana, ho hum) owed more to metal's bonecrushing aggression than to punk's machine-gun aesthetic. Both of which were taken from the Stooges (among others).

Anyway, forget the Beatles, or the Who, or the Kinks. You want a ground-zero culprit for loud guitar noises? Blame Link Wray's "Rumble."

[JeffreyWKramer]

Um, actually when I asked "Am I wrong?", I was not being rhetoric. I would actually be the first person to admit that the Beatles were certainly not the be all and end all of everything and many of the revolutions and innovations done in rock and roll had zilch to do with them. However, I was under the impression that the VU's music was somewhat "sleepy" even at its most distorted and as such would not be able to match Helter Skelter's sheer speedy verocity. I in NO WAY believe that the Beatles played a bigger role in the development of punk than the VU but I thought that in this area at least, they might have. I was wrong. That's fine, I knew that could well be the case seeing as how my exposure to the VU has been limited to their more normal stuff and my argument was based on hearsay because of my reluctance to buy their albums (and the difficulty in finding them) specifically because these sonix experiments aren't really my cup of tea. I am, however, now downloading Heroin because a) I admit that my lack of knowledge in this department is a fairly big hole in my musical development so I want to see what I'm missing and b) to see if I might actually want to hunt down these albums because I do like their normal stuff somewhat. And yes, I know that I do have some ignorance about quite a few bands but I am constantly working on it and I doubt that my musical (at least within rock and pop music, I don't give a damn about hip hop) ignorance is really that much worse than anyone else's.

You owe the VU more of a listen. The sonic experiments like "Sister Ray" may not do much for you - frankly, they aren't my favorite VU material either - but they are undeniably influential. As to being "sleepy" compared to "Helter Skelter", for every slower-paced song like "Venus in Furs", "All Tomorrow's Parties", "I'll Be Your Mirror" or most of "Heroin", there were songs that were anything but slow...kinda like the Beatles, who were the same guys who did "Helter Skelter" and "Long and Winding Road." There's stuff like "Black Angel's Death Song" on the first VU album that's faster-paced than "Helter Skelter", and I think some of the later parts of "Heroin" are much more an influence on the punk sound than was the entirety of the Beatles catalog.

Sorry if my tone came off a bit snarky, though.

[Buried Alien]

Blame Link Wray's "Rumble."

That was still more orderly and genteel than heavy metal or punk ever would have aspired to, loud guitar distortion notwithstanding. Besides, electric guitar feedback goes back even further than that...to when electric guitars were first recorded for blues records during the 1920s. Back then, it was a technological limitation rather than a deliberate musical device, of course.

The differences between heavy metal and punk are more cultural than they are musical (although there are certainly musical discrepancies to be found). The differences between the two come down more to clothing, hairstyle, and related interests more than the sound of the musical styles themselves. It was almost like the 1970s/1980s version of the old Mods/Rockers split during the 1960s.


Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[JeffreyWKramer]

And on "My Guitar Gently Weeps": that was Eric Clapton doing the guitar solo, anyway, so Cream would be a better starting point for that argument. (But I think Harrison's chunky rhythm on that song can be considered proto-metal riffage. Judas Priest certainly never would have existed without it.)
Cream was more bluesy, though. Clapton's playing on "Weeps" was a move forward for Rock guitar.

Good point about Harrison's contribution, though.

[Buried Alien]

George Harrison probably learned a few tricks from Eric Clapton after "While My Guitar Gently Weeps." The sound of George Harrison's guitar-playing style after "Weeps" was different from what it had been like before. Increasingly on Beatles records and his own solo material, Harrison's guitar playing started to echo what Clapton did on "Weeps" and other records for Cream and Blind Faith during that era. Later, bands such as Badfinger and America would crib that guitar style as well.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[JeffreyWKramer]

Later, bands such as Badfinger and America would crib that guitar style as well.

But badly....

[Ilash]

You owe the VU more of a listen. The sonic experiments like "Sister Ray" may not do much for you - frankly, they aren't my favorite VU material either - but they are undeniably influential. As to being "sleepy" compared to "Helter Skelter", for every slower-paced song like "Venus in Furs", "All Tomorrow's Parties", "I'll Be Your Mirror" or most of "Heroin", there were songs that were anything but slow...kinda like the Beatles, who were the same guys who did "Helter Skelter" and "Long and Winding Road." There's stuff like "Black Angel's Death Song" on the first VU album that's faster-paced than "Helter Skelter", and I think some of the later parts of "Heroin" are much more an influence on the punk sound than was the entirety of the Beatles catalog.

Sorry if my tone came off a bit snarky, though.

S'okay, I come across pretty damned arrogant at times (though hopefully that's not as true as it once was) so I do understand where you're coming from though I am trying to be a bit more opne minded than I used to be.

Also, I have now listened to the infamous Heroin and most of it is actually really not bad at all, even soothing at times but yeah, that distorted bit is very punk-ish and much harsher than Helter Skelter ever was. If most of their other experimental stuff is like this then I should have no problem with this band, at least as far as listenability goes. On the other hand, I'm not so sure how successful an experiment it is because the distorted, experimental part clashes quite a bit with the very normal song that it is set over and though that may have been their purpose it does seem somewhat... inadequate to me. It also strikes me as pretty odd that while I understand why the punks would be influenced by the distortion, the normal side of the VU sounds the antithesis of punk musically to me. Oh yeah, I do LOVE Reed's singing in this though.

[Ilash]

But badly....

Dude, Badfinger rule. How could you say that?

[Ilash]

George Harrison probably learned a few tricks from Eric Clapton after "While My Guitar Gently Weeps." The sound of George Harrison's guitar-playing style after "Weeps" was different from what it had been like before. Increasingly on Beatles records and his own solo material, Harrison's guitar playing started to echo what Clapton did on "Weeps" and other records for Cream and Blind Faith during that era. Later, bands such as Badfinger and America would crib that guitar style as well.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

Good point. Harrison's guitar playing did noticably change and improve after this culminating with his stellar work on Abbey Road and ATMP (though most of his solo stuff boasts the same great guitar work). Actually, I noticed on their collaborations together on ATMP and Cloud 9, the two meshed so well that it was hard to really tell them apart.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Also, I have now listened to the infamous Heroin and most of it is actually really not bad at all, even soothing at times but yeah, that distorted bit is very punk-ish and much harsher than Helter Skelter ever was. If most of their other experimental stuff is like this then I should have no problem with this band, at least as far as listenability goes.
If you are okay with the harsher part of "Heroin", you should be good to go with THE VU AND NICO, then. "Sister Ray" is another thing entirely, though.

On the other hand, I'm not so sure how successful an experiment it is because the distorted, experimental part clashes quite a bit with the very normal song that it is set over and though that may have been their purpose it does seem somewhat... inadequate to me.

I think you're missing the point of the song there. Reed was writing about the horrific nature of addiction. The first part is about being blissed out... the second part deals more with the how you feel during withdrawl, and presents a graphic, unromanticized view of the reality of being a junkie. In that regard, the dischordant sounds go along well with the quicker pace of the singing, and with Reed's lyrics.

It also strikes me as pretty odd that while I understand why the punks would be influenced by the distortion, the normal side of the VU sounds the antithesis of punk musically to me.
Again, keep in mind that it wasn't just the sound that influenced punk. The VU's primary influence was in terms of content and attitude. They pushed the envelope as far as what rock could talk about - forget cars and girls and surfing, they were talking about sadomasochism and scoring drugs and being a junkie. "Venus in Furs" might be somewhat plodding (though that is also intentional, with the pacing and the use of percussion meant to convey the sense of an s/m scene without literally using the music to produce sound effects), but it had a harder edge than anything the Beatles, the Stones, the Who or any of their contemporaries were talking about.

Oh yeah, I do LOVE Reed's singing in this though.
On various recordings, both the orginal and numerous live versions over the years, "Heroin" is consistently one of the songs in which Lou's vocal style works to best effect, and in which he demonstrates more range and ability as a vocalist than he's generally credited with.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Dude, Badfinger rule. How could you say that?

Badfinger were derivative. I can't think about anything about them that someone else didn't do first, or better. Their catalog is forgettable.

They were better than America, though.

[Buried Alien]

Badfinger were derivative. I can't think about anything about them that someone else didn't do first, or better.

That's all right, though. A rock band doesn't have to reinvent the wheel to be good. The bottom line is to make music that both the musicians and their fans enjoy for musical (rather than marketing/fad) reasons.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[Ilash]

Badfinger were derivative. I can't think about anything about them that someone else didn't do first, or better. Their catalog is forgettable.

They were better than America, though.

Yeah but so are/were tons of other good bands to come out both before and after them. And I know this will come across as sacrilege but I really don't see them as being any worse than the mighty "innovative" Big Star.

Honestly, if you care so much about innovativeness you would be even more of 60s purist than I am, and you're not are you?

[Ilash]

If you are okay with the harsher part of "Heroin", you should be good to go with THE VU AND NICO, then. "Sister Ray" is another thing entirely, though.

So I hear.




I think you're missing the point of the song there. Reed was writing about the horrific nature of addiction. The first part is about being blissed out... the second part deals more with the how you feel during withdrawl, and presents a graphic, unromanticized view of the reality of being a junkie. In that regard, the dischordant sounds go along well with the quicker pace of the singing, and with Reed's lyrics.

Nah, I got that. It may be intentionally awkward but it's still awkward and on a purely musical level the musicless distortion really does detract from the song. So yeah, mission accomplished to them, huh?


Again, keep in mind that it wasn't just the sound that influenced punk. The VU's primary influence was in terms of content and attitude. They pushed the envelope as far as what rock could talk about - forget cars and girls and surfing, they were talking about sadomasochism and scoring drugs and being a junkie. "Venus in Furs" might be somewhat plodding (though that is also intentional, with the pacing and the use of percussion meant to convey the sense of an s/m scene without literally using the music to produce sound effects), but it had a harder edge than anything the Beatles, the Stones, the Who or any of their contemporaries were talking about.

Oh yeah, lyrically I totally get where you're coming from. But musically, it's just so surprising that these ultra-laid back fellas would be so influential to the punks.


On various recordings, both the orginal and numerous live versions over the years, "Heroin" is consistently one of the songs in which Lou's vocal style works to best effect, and in which he demonstrates more range and ability as a vocalist than he's generally credited with.

Yeah, I also don't normally give him enough credit it seems because his work here is simply superb.

[JeffreyWKramer]

That's all right, though. A rock band doesn't have to reinvent the wheel to be good. The bottom line is to make music that both the musicians and their fans enjoy for musical (rather than marketing/fad) reasons.

Newsflash. Most people don't enjoy Badfinger these days. This is largely because they don't stand out in any manner from any number of third-string acts from that era.


Yeah but so are/were tons of other good bands to come out both before and after them. And I know this will come across as sacrilege but I really don't see them as being any worse than the mighty "innovative" Big Star.

Big Star was somewhat more innovative, but I think them over-rated as well.

Honestly, if you care so much about innovativeness you would be even more of 60s purist than I am, and you're not are you?

I love a lot of the stuff from the 60s. I love the early beach sound, I love the Stones' melding of roots rock and blues, I love the Beatles - and most particularly their middle period, which I consider to have been the most successfully innovative - I love the Kinks and the Who, I love Motown, I adore the VU and Jimi Hendrix. The innovations are a big part of that. So was sheer skill. I like the Beatles and the other bands listed, but I can take or leave a lot of their contemporaries. I can always find something else to listen to than Badfinger or Herman's Hermits.

Also, innovation didn't stop with the 60s. Alice Cooper, 70s Who, Zep, Iggy, Bowie, Black Sabbath, the punks, the better New Wave folk, hip hop, even some of the much-maligned disco folk... innovators all. Some innovation (concept albums, theatrical rock, art rock, disco) didn't always lead rock to good places, but it helped push the boundaries... and at every stop along the way, there were some damn fine acts. For example, most disco is crap, but anyone who doesn't recognize genius in an act like Chic is either deaf, or simply not paying attention.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Yeah, I also don't normally give him enough credit it seems because his work here is simply superb.

Check out "Pale Blue Eyes."

My greatest regret re: VU AND NICO is that Nico, rather than Lou, sang "I'll Be Your Mirror." She simply didn't have the emotional range required by that song.

[Buried Alien]

Newsflash. Most people don't enjoy Badfinger these days. This is largely because they don't stand out in any manner from any number of third-string acts from that era.

Other than the legendary giants, however, few rock acts find legions of new fans decades after they stopped recording new music. That's just the natural attrition of popularity that all performers experience over time (the legends less so than the regulars). Badfinger's music was enjoyed by its fans at the peak of its career. It's still fondly remembered and enjoyed by the band's old fans now. The band probably wins a few new converts every year. That's good enough. Badfinger didn't need to replicate the Beatles' success to be a good band in its own right. Reinventing rock was never Badfinger's goal; entertaining its audience was. Mission accomplished.


Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[Adam Crocker]

Though harsh electric guitar sounds were indeed around long before (well, a few months but this is teh explosive 60s we're talking about here) Helter Skelter. However, most of the examples you brought were very much blues-based while the sheer sonic onslaught of Helter Skelter had not been heard of yet in rock and roll, to my knowledge.

"Purple Haze" was just as much of a sonic onslaught as "Helter Skelter" if not as frenetically paced. (That's a not a knock against "Helter Skelter" by the way.)


Oh yeah, lyrically I totally get where you're coming from. But musically, it's just so surprising that these ultra-laid back fellas would be so influential to the punks.

Laid back? Certainly moreso than most punk bands, but you make the VU sound like a country band. The VU's primitive distortion was much closer to punk than "Helter Skelter" and much more of an influence on punk.

You're 100% wrong. Some aspects of "Helter Skelter" may have caught aspects of the punk sound, but the VU's music completely caught the punk aesthetic...

More to the point outside of the poppier bands, there weren't that many punk bands that cite the Beatles as an influence. This includes the New York set.

However, among punk and early post-punk bands that started out punk we have: the Stooges, Patti Smith, Richard Hell and his guitarist Robert Quine (HUGE VU fan), the Sex Pistols, the Fall, the New York Dolls, the Dictators, the Buzzcocks, Joy Division, Television, Siouxsie and the Banshees, Rocket From the Tombs (which led to Pere Ubu and the Dead Boys), Wire, and more.


And later, what was grunge but putting the metal back in punk? Iggy Pop was surprised and a little disconcerted when Sonic Youth played "We Will Fall" (he didn't think anyone wanted to listen to it, let alone cover it), but the wall-of-noise feedbackery that Sonic Youth (among others) make a key component of 80s indie (and thus helped launch Nirvana, ho hum) owed more to metal's bonecrushing aggression than to punk's machine-gun aesthetic. Both of which were taken from the Stooges (among others).

I have to take issue with this claim. I think you're ignoring that SY's musical background included not only punk and the VU but fuzz laced pyschedelia (which included an obscure band called the Godz who recorded this bizarre, incompetent, dissonant fuzz laced pysch), as well Lee Ranaldo's avante-garde roots playing in Glenn Branca's band. Besides, Sabbath is the only metal band I can see influencing SY prior to Doom Metal.

[Jonathan Bogart]

That was still more orderly and genteel than heavy metal or punk ever would have aspired to, loud guitar distortion notwithstanding. Besides, electric guitar feedback goes back even further than that...to when electric guitars were first recorded for blues records during the 1920s. Back then, it was a technological limitation rather than a deliberate musical device, of course.
A little off on the chronology; the electric guitar wasn't developed until the late 1930s and was only popularized in blues circles by T-Bone Walker in 1942. And I'll stand by my statement that "Rumble" is the first time (especially in a rock & roll context, which is important) that major levels of distortion were consciously employed in order to give a sense of aggression and menace. All punk and metal draws from that idea, whether they know it or not.

Sure it was polite; instrumental rock was innately polite. But it inspired Dave Davies, Pete Townshend, Tommy Iommi and Ron Asheton no end.

[JeffreyWKramer]

However, among punk and early post-punk bands that started out punk we have: the Stooges, Patti Smith, Richard Hell and his guitarist Robert Quine (HUGE VU fan), the Sex Pistols, the Fall, the New York Dolls, the Dictators, the Buzzcocks, Joy Division, Television, Siouxsie and the Banshees, Rocket From the Tombs (which led to Pere Ubu and the Dead Boys), Wire, and more.

And it didn't stop there. The grunge and alt rockers also all point to the VU as major influence. I'd argue that in terms of direct influence on other rock folk, only Chuck Berry surpassed the Velvet Underground.

[Jonathan Bogart]

I have to take issue with this claim. I think you're ignoring that SY's musical background included not only punk and the VU but fuzz laced pyschedelia (which included an obscure band called the Godz who recorded this bizarre, incompetent, dissonant fuzz laced pysch), as well Lee Ranaldo's avante-garde roots playing in Glenn Branca's band. Besides, Sabbath is the only metal band I can see influencing SY prior to Doom Metal.
Well, that's what I get for trying to say something nice about metal.

[howyadoin]

It took guitar solos in a new direction, one which pointed the way, sound-wise, to proto-metal bands like Deep Purple.I don't think the solo was much different from any of the others Clapton was playing at that point.

[Ilash]

Check out "Pale Blue Eyes."

My greatest regret re: VU AND NICO is that Nico, rather than Lou, sang "I'll Be Your Mirror." She simply didn't have the emotional range required by that song.

Oh yeah, I have heard that one. Yup, another good one.

[howyadoin]

Check out "Pale Blue Eyes."

My greatest regret re: VU AND NICO is that Nico, rather than Lou, sang "I'll Be Your Mirror." She simply didn't have the emotional range required by that song.Or any other, in my opinion.

Then again, singing like a robot was her shtick, right?

[Buried Alien]

Then again, singing like a robot was her shtick, right?

That would prove influential in the 1980s, for better or worse.



Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[Ilash]

"Purple Haze" was just as much of a sonic onslaught as "Helter Skelter" if not as frenetically paced. (That's a not a knock against "Helter Skelter" by the way.)


I just don't see it being on the same level as Helter Skelter in this case though that's certainly no knock on Purple Haze, which is easily the better of the two.


Laid back? Certainly moreso than most punk bands, but you make the VU sound like a country band. The VU's primitive distortion was much closer to punk than "Helter Skelter" and much more of an influence on punk.


Their distortion, at least if it's in the same vain as Heroin, has little to do with actual music. Their normal music is REAL dreamy though from what I've heard. Nothing I've heard from these guys, make me think that they can really rock out at all.


More to the point outside of the poppier bands, there weren't that many punk bands that cite the Beatles as an influence. This includes the New York set.

However, among punk and early post-punk bands that started out punk we have: the Stooges, Patti Smith, Richard Hell and his guitarist Robert Quine (HUGE VU fan), the Sex Pistols, the Fall, the New York Dolls, the Dictators, the Buzzcocks, Joy Division, Television, Siouxsie and the Banshees, Rocket From the Tombs (which led to Pere Ubu and the Dead Boys), Wire, and more.


No argument here. But the Beatles influenced everybody even if in an entirely indirect way.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Or any other, in my opinion.

Then again, singing like a robot was her shtick, right?


Her detached sound worked well for some of the songs, like "All Tomorrow's Parties", but was a disaster on others.

I've avoided listening to any of her non-Velvets recordings.

[JeffreyWKramer]

No argument here. But the Beatles influenced everybody even if in an entirely indirect way.

I would argue that the Beatles influenced the music business more than they directly influenced other musicians. Sure, everyone listens to the Beatles, and a few cover some of their songs, but relatively few really try to emulate them (the Knack was one exception). Most know they simply can't do that, just like nobody really tries to be Mozart or Stravinsky.

Probably the best influence of the Beatles on other artists was that they demonstrated you didn't have to stay stuck doing one thing over and over. Before them, few popular recording artists really branched out far past whatever had originally gotten them attention. This kept some, like Elvis, from growing as artists. But, with RUBBER SOUL and REVOLVER, the Beatles demonstrated that you could grow as artists and still find success. Other bands - the Stones, the Beach Boys - did some of this more or less simultaneously, but none to the same extent, and nobody else of that time radically reinvented themselves so often and so successfully. Even today, few bands have managed to change so much with time while still being successful - the best exception might be Madonna, and in her case, the change was based on cold calculation more than artistic growth. Still, while nobody else has done it as well, pop artists now are a lot more free to branch out in different directions than tended to be the case before the Beatles.

[Jonathan Bogart]

I've avoided listening to any of her non-Velvets recordings.
Ooh, I like Nico's solo stuff a lot. (Better than the Velvet Underground, in fact, but I'm often bored to tears with guitar-bass-drums music.)

She had a great folk-pop album, in the Vashti Bunyan mold, in 1969, and then went kind of Yoko Ono, only much more listenable.

[Ilash]

Newsflash. Most people don't enjoy Badfinger these days. This is largely because they don't stand out in any manner from any number of third-string acts from that era.


And also because most people don't listen to good music anymore.


Big Star was somewhat more innovative, but I think them over-rated as well.

Ah well, so much for baiting you with this.



I love a lot of the stuff from the 60s. I love the early beach sound, I love the Stones' melding of roots rock and blues, I love the Beatles - and most particularly their middle period, which I consider to have been the most successfully innovative - I love the Kinks and the Who, I love Motown, I adore the VU and Jimi Hendrix. The innovations are a big part of that. So was sheer skill. I like the Beatles and the other bands listed, but I can take or leave a lot of their contemporaries. I can always find something else to listen to than Badfinger or Herman's Hermits.

Also, innovation didn't stop with the 60s. Alice Cooper, 70s Who, Zep, Iggy, Bowie, Black Sabbath, the punks, the better New Wave folk, hip hop, even some of the much-maligned disco folk... innovators all. Some innovation (concept albums, theatrical rock, art rock, disco) didn't always lead rock to good places, but it helped push the boundaries... and at every stop along the way, there were some damn fine acts. For example, most disco is crap, but anyone who doesn't recognize genius in an act like Chic is either deaf, or simply not paying attention.

So regardless of when, do you listen mostly to stuff that is innovative? While I would be the first to admit that music is generally better if its innovative, it can be just as enjoyable if it's not.

[howyadoin]

... kind of Yoko Ono, only much more listenable.That's not necessarily sayin' much.

[howyadoin]

Still, while nobody else has done it as well, pop artists now are a lot more free to branch out in different directions than tended to be the case before the Beatles.That's something I think about a lot - yeah, they broke a lot of new ground, as did quite a few acts in that era. But how much of it was a case of being in the right place at the right time? Any creative medium where the limits haven't been explored is ripe for the picking.

[JeffreyWKramer]

And also because most people don't listen to good music anymore.
I disagree with this. The popular music scene isn't much to my taste right now, bit it isn't entirely devoid, either. Things go through cycles.

So regardless of when, do you listen mostly to stuff that is innovative? While I would be the first to admit that music is generally better if its innovative, it can be just as enjoyable if it's not.

I can't think offhand of an artist I really enjoy or often listen to who wasn't/isn't innovative or different in some manner from whatever came before. Few are so innovative as, say, Hendrix, but all the bands and artists I enjoy have something distinct about them, and produced some small innovation. This is what sorts out significant artists from the vast hordes of wannabees and garage bands.

So, no, I don't think it can be as enjoyable. I don't like any of the other Mersey artists anywhere near as much as I do the early Beatles. I don't enjoy any of the hordes of hair bands as much as I do the solid metal bands that either originated the sound or took it in new directions. I don't like interchangeable, radio-friendly early 70s acts like Bread and America and Badfinger, nor do I like their late-70s/early 80s equivalents like Journey, REO, Head East or April Wine.

Honestly, I think people who settle for something that is interchangeable with something else are being emotionally lazy. I can put up with that with comics, which is one reason I'm not bothered by some book like NEW THUNDERBOLTS, which is very much a standard Marvel book, but I expect more out of music. I should probably expect more out of comics, too, but I tend to turn to superhero comics mostly as disposable junk entertainment, whereas music resonates much deeper with me.

[JeffreyWKramer]

That's something I think about a lot - yeah, they broke a lot of new ground, as did quite a few acts in that era. But how much of it was a case of being in the right place at the right time? Any creative medium where the limits haven't been explored is ripe for the picking.


I think it could only have happened at the right place and time, but I think it is no accident the Beatles did it. They had a better combination of skilll, innovative ability and diversity of taste than any pop act before their time. Also, they were blessed to have a producer in George Martin who trusted their instincts, cared about art as well as money, and who wasn't so much a control freak as so many others.

[JeffreyWKramer]

That's not necessarily sayin' much.

LOL! Yeah, faint praise indeed.

[leonaozaki]

Their distortion, at least if it's in the same vain as Heroin, has little to do with actual music. Their normal music is REAL dreamy though from what I've heard. Nothing I've heard from these guys, make me think that they can really rock out at all.



"I'm Waiting for the Man" doesn't rock? "White Light/White Heat" doesn't? "I Can't Stand It" doesn't? "Rock N' Roll?" "Sweet Jane?"

Maaaaaan.

rob

[Adam Crocker]

I just don't see it being on the same level as Helter Skelter in this case though that's certainly no knock on Purple Haze, which is easily the better of the two.

Why not? I find it's every bit the aural assault that "Helter Skelter" is with its vicious introduction and screaming guitar.

"I'm Waiting for the Man" doesn't rock? "White Light/White Heat" doesn't? "I Can't Stand It" doesn't? "Rock N' Roll?" "Sweet Jane?"


True story, "I'm Waiting for the Man" is Thurston Moore's favourite VU song. And Robert Quine's.

(But you forgot "I Heard Her Call My Name" and "European Son." And on that note I'll leave off here, and post a proper response to Ilash about the VU's music tomorrow.)

[Ilash]

"I'm Waiting for the Man" doesn't rock? "White Light/White Heat" doesn't? "I Can't Stand It" doesn't? "Rock N' Roll?" "Sweet Jane?"

Maaaaaan.

rob

Okay, I've heard two of those: Waiting for the Man and Rock and Roll and no, neither of these really rock. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying they're ballads or anything and yes, their tempo is definitely upbeat but they still have that sort of sleepy sound to them that stops them from really taking off. They're both awesome songs, undoubtedly but they still sound relatively tame to my ears (you guys may well feel differently about this but that's how I see it) in comparison to Cream, Hendrix or the Stones. On the plus side though, you guys have certainly convinced me to give them a chance (after all I do love quite a few MUCH tamer bands than these guys) and I'll try pick up their albums though I think I'll leave the apparently distortion heavy White Light/ Blach Heat for last. One question though, just how bearable is Nico's voice on their first album anyway?

[Ilash]

I disagree with this. The popular music scene isn't much to my taste right now, bit it isn't entirely devoid, either. Things go through cycles.



I can't think offhand of an artist I really enjoy or often listen to who wasn't/isn't innovative or different in some manner from whatever came before. Few are so innovative as, say, Hendrix, but all the bands and artists I enjoy have something distinct about them, and produced some small innovation. This is what sorts out significant artists from the vast hordes of wannabees and garage bands.

So, no, I don't think it can be as enjoyable. I don't like any of the other Mersey artists anywhere near as much as I do the early Beatles. I don't enjoy any of the hordes of hair bands as much as I do the solid metal bands that either originated the sound or took it in new directions. I don't like interchangeable, radio-friendly early 70s acts like Bread and America and Badfinger, nor do I like their late-70s/early 80s equivalents like Journey, REO, Head East or April Wine.

Honestly, I think people who settle for something that is interchangeable with something else are being emotionally lazy. I can put up with that with comics, which is one reason I'm not bothered by some book like NEW THUNDERBOLTS, which is very much a standard Marvel book, but I expect more out of music. I should probably expect more out of comics, too, but I tend to turn to superhero comics mostly as disposable junk entertainment, whereas music resonates much deeper with me.

On the whole I actually agree with you a fair amount. Originality in music is very important to me too. However, I don't see why a band can't be perfectly enjoyable (though you're right, not "as enjoyable as") even if they aren't all that unique. I for one love a lot of those one hit wonder songs from all those Beatles rip offs in the sixties like the Searchers, the Troggs or the Dave Clark Five. Or Badfinger and Big Star for that matter. Yes, non-original artists tend not to be great but they're hardly worthless either.

Actually, I am kind of confused about your statement about modern pop music when you consider that even the best of it is highly, highly derivitive of popular music from decades past.

[leonaozaki]

On the whole I actually agree with you a fair amount. Originality in music is very important to me too. However, I don't see why a band can't be perfectly enjoyable (though you're right, not "as enjoyable as") even if they aren't all that unique. I for one love a lot of those one hit wonder songs from all those Beatles rip offs in the sixties like the Searchers, the Troggs or the Dave Clark Five. Or Badfinger and Big Star for that matter. Yes, non-original artists tend not to be great but they're hardly worthless either.

Actually, I am kind of confused about your statement about modern pop music when you consider that even the best of it is highly, highly derivitive of popular music from decades past.

My head hurts. You always knock Franz Ferdinand for not being quite innovative enough, and how originality is what matters to you in pop music, but then you say something like this. So which is it?

rob

[leonaozaki]

Okay, I've heard two of those: Waiting for the Man and Rock and Roll and no, neither of these really rock. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying they're ballads or anything and yes, their tempo is definitely upbeat but they still have that sort of sleepy sound to them that stops them from really taking off. They're both awesome songs, undoubtedly but they still sound relatively tame to my ears (you guys may well feel differently about this but that's how I see it) in comparison to Cream, Hendrix or the Stones. On the plus side though, you guys have certainly convinced me to give them a chance (after all I do love quite a few MUCH tamer bands than these guys) and I'll try pick up their albums though I think I'll leave the apparently distortion heavy White Light/ Blach Heat for last. One question though, just how bearable is Nico's voice on their first album anyway?

If you don't think that "Waiting for the Man" and "Rock N Roll" are rocking songs then...I'm not really sure what to say. Do they "rock" in the same way that Cream, the Stones and Hendrix did? No. Is that their goal? Again, no. But if you really want to hear how the Velvets influenced punk rock you need to listen to WHITE LIGHT/WHITE HEAT -- specifically the title track, "I Heard Her Call My Name," and, most importantly, "Sister Ray."

Paradoxically, I don't recommend WHITE LIGHT/WHITE HEAT for anyone 'new' to the VU; you're much better off sticking with THE VELVET UNDERGROUND AND NICO, then trying THE VELVET UNDERGROUND and perhaps LOADED. But WHITE LIGHT/WHITE HEAT is a great album, and settles once and for all this debate about the Velvets' influence on punk as well as their ability to flat out rock-- because "I Heard Her Call My Name" does both.

And I don't think Nico is all that bad on THE VELVET UNDERGROUND AND NICO myself. I still enjoy the album immensely.

rob

[Ilash]

My head hurts. You always knock Franz Ferdinand for not being quite innovative enough, and how originality is what matters to you in pop music, but then you say something like this. So which is it?

rob

Simple. Franz Ferdinand's lack of originality means that I will never consider them a truly great band that could measure up to the true giants of popular music. Doesn't mean I can't enjoy them though.

[Ilash]

If you don't think that "Waiting for the Man" and "Rock N Roll" are rocking songs then...I'm not really sure what to say. Do they "rock" in the same way that Cream, the Stones and Hendrix did? No. Is that their goal? Again, no. But if you really want to hear how the Velvets influenced punk rock you need to listen to WHITE LIGHT/WHITE HEAT -- specifically the title track, "I Heard Her Call My Name," and, most importantly, "Sister Ray."

Paradoxically, I don't recommend WHITE LIGHT/WHITE HEAT for anyone 'new' to the VU; you're much better off sticking with THE VELVET UNDERGROUND AND NICO, then trying THE VELVET UNDERGROUND and perhaps LOADED. But WHITE LIGHT/WHITE HEAT is a great album, and settles once and for all this debate about the Velvets' influence on punk as well as their ability to flat out rock-- because "I Heard Her Call My Name" does both.

And I don't think Nico is all that bad on THE VELVET UNDERGROUND AND NICO myself. I still enjoy the album immensely.

rob

Aye, well, thanks for the tip. White Light/ White Heat is definitely the album I will be getting last.

[howyadoin]

On the whole I actually agree with you a fair amount. Originality in music is very important to me too. However, I don't see why a band can't be perfectly enjoyable (though you're right, not "as enjoyable as") even if they aren't all that unique. I for one love a lot of those one hit wonder songs from all those Beatles rip offs in the sixties like the Searchers, the Troggs or the Dave Clark Five. Or Badfinger and Big Star for that matter. Yes, non-original artists tend not to be great but they're hardly worthless either.You should check out the Nuggets box set.

[Ilash]

You should check out the Nuggets box set.

Yup but I can't find it anywhere, especially not at a decent price. I have downloaded quite a few great, great songs from it. And yeah, those nuggets bands are also great examples of what I'm talking about.

[howyadoin]

Yup but I can't find it anywhere, especially not at a decent price. I have downloaded quite a few great, great songs from it. And yeah, those nuggets bands are also great examples of what I'm talking about.I don't remember exactly what I paid for it, but yeah, it was a big investment at the time.

And like you say, there's not a whole lotta innovation there, just joyful noise.