1969: Rock's Greatest Year?

[Brad Barton]

I always wondered how the "perfect storm" of Rock music happened to collide in a single year. Was it coincidental? Fate? However you want to look at it, 1969 was proabably the greatest, most all encompassing year in Rock and Roll's history....and while I think people know this on some very cosmetic level, I don't think everyone is mindful of the sheer volume of legendary rock that came out of this single, amazing year:

Let's see....

The Beatles: Let it Be & Abbey Road - Final Albums
Led Zeppelin: Led Zeppelin I & II - Debut Albums
The Rolling Stones: Let it Bleed
Jimi Hendrix Experience: Plays at legendary Woodstock Festival
Deep Purple: 3 Albums, including Concerto for group and Orchestra
The Who: Tommy
Pink Floyd: Ummagumma
Cream: Goodbye - Final Album
The Kinks: Arthur
The Doors: The Soft Parade - Final Studio Album
Bob Marley and The Wailers: Soul Shakedown - Debut Album
David Bowie - Space Oddity - First hit single
King Crimson: In the Court of the Crimson King - Debut album
Creedence Clearwater Revival: Green River - Breakthrough Album
The Stooges: The Stooges - Debut Album
Elton John: Empty Sky - Debut Album
The Velvet Underground: The Velvet Underground

Also: Black Sabbath, Judas Priest, Alice Cooper, The Doobie brothers, Grand Funk Railroad and many others formed in 69, and in most cases released their debut albums in either '69 or '70.

Thats just a fraction of the awesome rock revolution that was going on in 1969. the old guard were in their "Winter", giving way to the newer generation of Uber-Rock bands just in thier "Spring", and this single year seems to be the only one in which essentially every major Rock Group of the era crossed over.

So, was there a better year for Rock? If so, which, and why?
For sheer wealth of classic material, I challenge anyone to come up with a single year that better defined the genre we know and love as Rock and Roll. The only years I can think of revolve around 69 anyhow -- '66, '68, '70-'73 -- I think this 5 or 6 year period in Rock will most likely define the genre as long as it exists, because *looks at todays Rock* I don't think we're headed for a new Rock renaissance anytime soon.

[Ilash]

It is a very, very strong contender, definitely. Hell, two of my three all time favourite albums come from 1969 (Abbey Road and Let It Bleed).

[jesse_custer]

I like any thread that mentions the Doobie Brothers and Grand Funk Railroad in the same sentence.

[Aubergine~!]

I'd back 1967. 1969 was fantastic, but I suppose I simply prefer the albums released in 1967.

The Velvet Underground & Nico
Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band
Magical Mystery Tour
The Who Sell Out
The Doors
Disraeli Gears
Moby Grape
Surrealistic Pillow
Forever Changes
The Piper at the Gates of Dawn
John Wesley Harding
Are You Experienced?
Between the Buttons
Something Else by the Kinks

And those are just the undisputed (and well known) classics. There's also stuff like 2 solid Beach Boys albums, Leonard Cohen's debut, another Stones album, another Hendrix album, plus whatever I'm forgetting.

[leonaozaki]

The Beatles: Let it Be & Abbey Road - Final Album

Really, that's two albums, and Let it Be wasn't released until 1970. Both are overrated anyway, although Abbey Road is of course the superior album. It's just that I don't like the first side very much; the second half is of course great. But neither are a patch on the "White Album" or Sgt Pepper's.

Led Zep I and II: Sure.

The Rolling Stones: Let it Bleed

Overrated; "Gimme Shelter," "Live with Me" "You Got the Silver" and "You Can't Always Get What You Want" are great, the rest...okay. Beggar's Banquet and Exile on Main Street are much much better.

Jimi Hendrix Experience: Plays at legendary Woodstock Festival

Not their best performance. The actual musical worth of Woodstock is pretty questionable anyway.

Deep Purple: 3 Albums, including Concerto for group and Orchestra

Deep Purple?

The Who: Tommy

Great sound; great individual songs; doesn't hold up so well as an album. Who's Next is better.

Pink Floyd: Ummagumma

Seriously? Ummagumma?!

Cream: Goodbye - Final Album

And good riddance.

The Kinks: Arthur

We can agree on this one.

The Doors: The Soft Parade - Final Studio Album

Not counting Morrison Hotel or L.A. Woman, are we?

Bob Marley and The Wailers: Soul Shakedown - Debut Album

Are you thinking of Soul Rebels, which came out in 1970?

David Bowie - Space Oddity - First hit single

Good call, but Bowie didn't really take off until Ziggy Stardust (and even then he really only had hits in the U.K.), so I don't how significant this single is.

King Crimson: In the Court of the Crimson King - Debut album
Creedence Clearwater Revival: Green River - Breakthrough Album
The Stooges: The Stooges - Debut Album

Good call on all three of these.

Elton John: Empty Sky - Debut Album

A pretty bad record, actually. No hit singles either.

The Velvet Underground: The Velvet Underground

Great album, but not their best, or most influential, work by a long yard.


Also: Black Sabbath, Judas Priest, Alice Cooper, The Doobie brothers, Grand Funk Railroad and many others formed in 69, and in most cases released their debut albums in either '69 or '70.

The Doobies? Grand Funk? All righty then.

[jesse_custer]

I find myself agreeing with nearly everything leonazaki said. Some additional comments:

I don't think Sgt. Peppers' is better than Abbey Road. I'll give you The White Album, however.

Indeed, Ummagumma is utter nonsense. Pink Floyd didn't become reasonable again until Meddle.

L.A. Woman destroys any other Doors album released. Seriously. The best collection of hits and nonhits from Morrison and company.

How can you not love "Long Train Runnin'" by the Doobie Brothers?

[Brad Barton]

The Beatles: Let it Be & Abbey Road - Final Album

Really, that's two albums, and Let it Be wasn't released until 1970. Both are overrated anyway, although Abbey Road is of course the superior album. It's just that I don't like the first side very much; the second half is of course great. But neither are a patch on the "White Album" or Sgt Pepper's.White album is indeed overrated (as I believe Jesse pointed out), Let it Be is generally what I consider to be their most underrated album, behind Magical Mystery Tour.

Jimi Hendrix Experience: Plays at legendary Woodstock Festival

Not their best performance. The actual musical worth of Woodstock is pretty questionable anyway.I think you're downplaying the cultural significance of Woodstock. Everyone remembers it, usually fondly, that's what makes it important.

Hendrix happened to have the most well received and ultimately emulated showing there. I think it's very significant when looking at 69 as a year in music.

Deep Purple?Yeah, you know, Ritchie Blackmore, "Smoke on the Water", Millions of records sold, one of the biggest rock bands of all-time -- that Deep Purple.

The Who: Tommy

Great sound; great individual songs; doesn't hold up so well as an album. Who's Next is better.

Pink Floyd: Ummagumma

Seriously? Ummagumma?!

Cream: Goodbye - Final Album

And good riddance.

The Kinks: Arthur

We can agree on this one.And here we're all down to personal taste, which isn't what my original point was. I was saying '69 was an important year solely for the fact that so many legendary bands were actively releasing new material, or just forming, during it.

I'm not necessarily saying every band I listed released the absolute best material of their careers in '69, I'm saying all these Rock Icons (virtually all of them) were still alive and recording, still a vital part of the music industry.

The Doors: The Soft Parade - Final Studio Album

Not counting Morrison Hotel or L.A. Woman, are we?

Bob Marley and The Wailers: Soul Shakedown - Debut Album

Are you thinking of Soul Rebels, which came out in 1970?Both true, but I got the info from Wikipedia so I guess that's not surprising. Still, it doesn't change the fact that both the Doors and Marley were vital, active players in the music industry.

David Bowie - Space Oddity - First hit single

Good call, but Bowie didn't really take off until Ziggy Stardust (and even then he really only had hits in the U.K.), so I don't how significant this single is.Sure, but this is generally his most well known song, and definitely the one that put him on the map. It's significant any way you slice it.

The Doobies? Grand Funk? All righty then.Yes, and if you're casually writing off either The Doobies or Grand Funk, both excellent Rock bands, then I'm not sure our musical tastes could possibly be any different. Your musical taste is the Bizarro of mine.

[Brad Barton]

I'd back 1967. 1969 was fantastic, but I suppose I simply prefer the albums released in 1967.

The Velvet Underground & Nico
Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band
Magical Mystery Tour
The Who Sell Out
The Doors
Disraeli Gears
Moby Grape
Surrealistic Pillow
Forever Changes
The Piper at the Gates of Dawn
John Wesley Harding
Are You Experienced?
Between the Buttons
Something Else by the KinksGood call. '67 was an awesome year as well, and probably the best overall year for Beatles albums, period.

Still, given how many new Iconic Rock bands got their start in '69, I think that helps it nudge '67 out. As I said before, though, 1965-1973 was a Rock and Roll renassiance, so much great music came out of these 8 years that it's sometimes hard to fully take in.

[leonaozaki]

Sure, but ["Space Oddity"] is generally [Bowie's] most well known song, and definitely the one that put him on the map. It's significant any way you slice it.



Better known than "Changes," "Ziggy Stardust," "Rebel Rebel," or even, God help us, "Let's Dance?"

rob

[Jonathan Bogart]

I'd qualify your claim. 1969 was a great year for a certain overblown, reaching-for-the-stars kind of rock & roll which later morphed into "classic rock." That's not the kind of rock & roll I like best. 1956, 1957, 1963, 1966, 1967, 1973, 1977, 1978, and 1979 tear it to shreds in that regard.

If you want to make a serious claim for the musical preeminence of 1969, you should open up the field. Soul, jazz, funk, reggae beyond Bob Marley, avant-garde classical, folk, and even country were having banner years at the same time. And there were some pretty amazing developments worldwide: Brazil, Japan, France, Germany, Jamaica, and a variety of West African countries were spearheading new musical forms (many of them inspired by rock) that would have a pretty profound impact on the music of today.

Just ommitting Bitches Brew, Stand! and At San Quentin makes your list sound like it doesn't know what it's talking about.

[Buried Alien]

I'd qualify your claim. 1969 was a great year for a certain overblown, reaching-for-the-stars kind of rock & roll which later morphed into "classic rock." That's not the kind of rock & roll I like best. 1956, 1957, 1963, 1966, 1967, 1973, 1977, 1978, and 1979 tear it to shreds in that regard.

If you want to make a serious claim for the musical preeminence of 1969, you should open up the field. Soul, jazz, funk, reggae beyond Bob Marley, avant-garde classical, folk, and even country were having banner years at the same time. And there were some pretty amazing developments worldwide: Brazil, Japan, France, Germany, Jamaica, and a variety of West African countries were spearheading new musical forms (many of them inspired by rock) that would have a pretty profound impact on the music of today.

Just ommitting Bitches Brew, Stand! and At San Quentin makes your list sound like it doesn't know what it's talking about.

I *knew* this response was coming...almost down to the exact words used! :D

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[leonaozaki]

I don't know why 1969 (or as the goalposts seem to keep moving, 1965-1973) is better than 1978-1984, or any other arbitrarily chosen date range.

rob

[jesse_custer]

I have to agree with Bogart on the late 1970s in particular. Elvis Costello and The Police alone recorded several awesome records--with little to no weak spots that I can hear--within that period.

In regard to 1969, I think Frank Zappa's Hot Rats is better than most of these aforementioned albums.

[howyadoin]

When did Grand Funk get retconned into a good band?

[leonaozaki]

When did Grand Funk get retconned into a good band?

That's what I'm saying. This is a band that covered "The Loco-Motion" and decided to help listeners along by making train noises during the track.

rob

[howyadoin]

That's what I'm saying. This is a band that covered "The Loco-Motion" and decided to help listeners along by making train noises during the track.From what I recall, they were so notoriously bad that they used to print negative reviews with their liner notes.

[jesse_custer]

I don't think they're good. But an enjoyable "just dicking around" band. They certainly don't justify a certain year of music being the best, though.

[Ilash]

Just ommitting Bitches Brew, Stand! and At San Quentin makes your list sound like it doesn't know what it's talking about.

Well, to be fair, the title of the thread does specifically refer to ROCK music, does it not?

[Ilash]

1963


Probably should have included this in the above post but while I understand the other years you listed (even if few of them rate as highly for me as '69), 1963? Unless I'm very wrong about this, wasn't '63 the last of those "down" years for rock and roll that took place between the end of the dominance of the 50s rock and roll stars and the Beatles and the British Invasion really kicking things up? Care to give some examples of great rock and roll (even in the greater sense) that came out from that year? I mean, I can think of some myself but I defer to you for a more in-depth list.

[Ilash]

From what I recall, they were so notoriously bad that they used to print negative reviews with their liner notes.

I don't much like Grand Funk Railroad at all but that's just unbelievably cool.

[howyadoin]

Probably should have included this in the above post but while I understand the other years you listed (even if few of them rate as highly for me as '69), 1963? Unless I'm very wrong about this, wasn't '63 the last of those "down" years for rock and roll that took place between the end of the dominance of the 50s rock and roll stars and the Beatles and the British Invasion really kicking things up? Care to give some examples of great rock and roll (even in the greater sense) that came out from that year? I mean, I can think of some myself but I defer to you for a more in-depth list.Hopefully it's not a bunch of guys named Bobby or Eddy in sharkskin suits.

[Buried Alien]

Probably should have included this in the above post but while I understand the other years you listed (even if few of them rate as highly for me as '69), 1963? Unless I'm very wrong about this, wasn't '63 the last of those "down" years for rock and roll that took place between the end of the dominance of the 50s rock and roll stars and the Beatles and the British Invasion really kicking things up? Care to give some examples of great rock and roll (even in the greater sense) that came out from that year? I mean, I can think of some myself but I defer to you for a more in-depth list.

1963 would have been the turnaround year.

I think Motown and Phil Spector's Wall of Sound had just gotten into high gear in 1963, and the Beach Boys were putting out some of their best early singles too. Moreover, 1963 saw the Beatles give us the PLEASE PLEASE ME and WITH THE BEATLES albums plus the "She Loves You" and "I Want To Hold Your Hand" singles, and I think the Stones had begun recording.

1963's place in rock history is indeed underrated in favor of the decade's later years.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[leonaozaki]

1963 would have been the turnaround year.

I think Motown and Phil Spector's Wall of Sound had just gotten into high gear in 1963, and the Beach Boys were putting out some of their best early singles too. Moreover, 1963 saw the Beatles give us PLEASE PLEASE ME and WITH THE BEATLES, and I think the Stones had begun recording.

1963's place in rock history is indeed underrated in favor of the decade's later years.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

I actually agree; 1963 was a seminal year. The Stones had begun recording-- probably their most important single from that year was "I Wanna Be Your Man" b/w "Stoned."

rob

[Adam C]

David Bowie - Space Oddity - First hit single

Good call, but Bowie didn't really take off until Ziggy Stardust (and even then he really only had hits in the U.K.), so I don't how significant this single is.


Well...even though his hits were largely in the UK, he can count on his Ziggy Stardust era inspiring Ian Mulloch (Echo & the Bunnymen), John Lydon (aka Johnny Rotten), Siouxsie Sioux, Peter Murphy (and the rest of Bauhaus), Mick Jones (the Clash), Ian Curtis (Joy Division), Adam Ant, etc. And its that glam sound that has had an impact on British punk, Goth rock, british synth pop, hair metal (ugh! but we are being historically accurate here), and Britpop (most obviously the neo-glam of Suede, but its not like Blur and Oasis weren't also influenced by that).

"Space Oddity" was done in the style of psychedelic British pop of the time ala Donovan or the Beatles, but its a sound that's only dimly remembered in Bowie's career and seems to register little in his overall artistic legacy or influence. I think the fact that he fell off the map after that single, only to really with Hunky Dory and its single "Life on Mars" (both hit #3 in the UK), which was the beginning of his cultural ascent, accentuates how minor "Space Oddity" probably is. (Even if the song is well recognised.)

[rick]

I have always been a big fan of 1977 myself, if for no other reason then all the bands that made their debut that year.

Here are some of the best albums from that year.....

Sex Pistols: Never Mind the Bullocks, here's the Sex Pistols
Throbbing Gristle: The Second Annual Report of Throbbing Gristle
Grateful Dead: Terrapin Station
Talking Heads: Talking Heads 77
Fleetwood Mac: Rumours
Bootsy Collins: Ahh. The Name is Bootsy, Baby!
Pink Floyd: Animals
Steely Dan: Aja
Elvis Costello: My Aim is True
Motorhead: Motorhead
Television: Marquee Moon
The Clash: The Clash
Lynyrd Skynyrd: Street Survivors
Iggy Pop: Lust for Life
KISS: Love Gun
David Bowie: Low
Scorpions: Virgin Killer
Kansas: Point of No Return
ZZ Top: Tejas
Meat Loaf: Bat Out of Hell
Peter Gabriel: Peter Gabriel
The Tubes: Now
Steve Miller: Book of Dreams
The Jam: This is the Modern World
The Kinks: Sleepwalker
Billy Joel: The Stranger
The Boomtown Rats: The Boomtown Rats
Ted Nugent: Cat Scratch Fever
Heart: Little Queen
Suicide: Suicide
Ultravox: Ultravox
Alan Parsons Project: I Robot
George Thorogood & The Destroyers: George Thorogood & The Destroyers
Ian Drury: New Boots and Panties!!
Randy Newman: Little Criminals
Alice Cooper: Lace & Whiskey

[Adam C]

Shouldn't the Jam's In the City be on there?

[rick]

Shouldn't the Jam's In the City be on there?


I was thinking it was '78, but actually you're right.

That was one of the highlights of '77.

[Adam C]

I was thinking it was '78, but actually you're right.

That was one of the highlights of '77.

Well it was the Jam's debut album, This Is the Modern World being their second which was delivered in the same year.

[rick]

Well it was the Jam's debut album, This Is the Modern World being their second which was delivered in the same year.

I could have sworn that Modern World came first, but Wikipedia says I'm wrong.

[leonaozaki]

"Space Oddity" was done in the style of psychedelic British pop of the time ala Donovan or the Beatles, but its a sound that's only dimly remembered in Bowie's career and seems to register little in his overall artistic legacy or influence. I think the fact that he fell off the map after that single, only to really with Hunky Dory and its single "Life on Mars" (both hit #3 in the UK), which was the beginning of his cultural ascent, accentuates how minor "Space Oddity" probably is. (Even if the song is well recognised.)

Plus he did his best to kill it off with "Ashes to Ashes."

rob

[Brad Barton]

Okay, I'm gonna take these all in one rant.

Better known than "Changes," "Ziggy Stardust," "Rebel Rebel," or even, God help us, "Let's Dance?"

robYes.

I'd qualify your claim. 1969 was a great year for a certain overblown, reaching-for-the-stars kind of rock & roll which later morphed into "classic rock." That's not the kind of rock & roll I like best. 1956, 1957, 1963, 1966, 1967, 1973, 1977, 1978, and 1979 tear it to shreds in that regard.Lol, so basically every year except '69?

What was it about these years that specifically made them better? It's easy to spew a bunch of years about, but you give no compelling arguments other than "These were better cuz I think so".

Just ommitting Bitches Brew, Stand! and At San Quentin makes your list sound like it doesn't know what it's talking about.First of all, Cash is country, so he wouldn't be included.

Second, my list wasn't meant to be every example applicable. I mean, I wasn't going to sit and list every artist and every album released in the year, I was doing a "highlight" sort of thing and was sure that you guys would help me fill out the list by throwing out suggestions, whether they be for '69 or other years, and it looks like we've got that going on, so mission accomplished.

I *knew* this response was coming...almost down to the exact words used! :D Hell, I even knew it was coming from Bogart. He's notorious for hit-and-run criticism.

I don't know why 1969 (or as the goalposts seem to keep moving, 1965-1973)The thread is pretty overtly about 1969, so no, the goalposts are still planted firmly in place.

is better than 1978-1984, or any other arbitrarily chosen date range.How is it arbitrary if I've made an effort to explain it? I'd say throwing out a year at random with no support of any kind behind it, as some of you've been doing, is a hell of a lot more arbitrary than stating a year then giving evidence to support it.

And please, go ahead and argue that 1965-1973, ('69 in particular) weren't crucially significant years in Rock history. Then I'll know you're just disagreeing to be argumentative.

When did Grand Funk get retconned into a good band?Aw, come on Howy. I'm Your captain? Heartbreaker? We're an American band?

Nothin'?

I don't think they're good. But an enjoyable "just dicking around" band. They certainly don't justify a certain year of music being the best, though.Jesse, don't let peer pressure get to you man.

You don't have to go from saying you like something straight to ambivalence because Howy said so. I mean, I know he's a ferocious guy, but he's always been great about allowing us our opinions 'round these parts. (thank you Mr. Howy, sir.)

Well, to be fair, the title of the thread does specifically refer to ROCK music, does it not?Well, the thread title says "Rock", but that can be selectively overlooked when one has an argument they want to make. ;)

[Adam C]

Plus he did his best to kill it off with "Ashes to Ashes."

I'll never forget when I first heard that song. Somehow I immediately picked up the lyric: "Ashes to Ashes/Fun to Funky/We know Major Toms a junkie/Strung out in heavens high/Hitting an all-time low."

[Adam C]

And just to get my foot in on this matter...

...I'm still puzzled as to what importance either Grand Funk or the Doobie Brothers have to defining rock music.

[Brad Barton]

1963 would have been the turnaround year.

I think Motown and Phil Spector's Wall of Sound had just gotten into high gear in 1963, and the Beach Boys were putting out some of their best early singles too. Moreover, 1963 saw the Beatles give us the PLEASE PLEASE ME and WITH THE BEATLES albums plus the "She Loves You" and "I Want To Hold Your Hand" singles, and I think the Stones had begun recording.Yeah, I think '63 was a great year for a few of these Icons in that that's when they broke through. As far as the Beatles -- I suppose it depends on whether you're partial to their "bubble-gum" years or the later, more mature and/or psychedelic stuff -- I think perhaps the latter 60's was when they were at their strongest, artistically.
If you're going for latter works, 1967 was definitely a strong year for the Fab Four. They had Sgt. Pepper (arguably their biggest album ever) and Magical Mystery Tour (chock full of classics).

Also, someone earlier mentioned that '63 was when the Stones released "I wanna be Your man", and indeed it was, but it was a Lennon/McCartney composition and the Beatles went on to record it with Ringo on their 2nd (?) album as well.

[howyadoin]

I think I'm gonna side with rick on 1977, even if I don't agree with all his examples.

However, I must admit that I'm somewhat biased, since 77 was something of a watershed year in my own life.

[twilight]

I also like '77 better than '69 but theres no denying that they both had heaps of good material.

-Twi

[Brad Barton]

I have always been a big fan of 1977 myself, if for no other reason then all the bands that made their debut that year.

Here are some of the best albums from that year.....

Sex Pistols: Never Mind the Bullocks, here's the Sex Pistols
Throbbing Gristle: The Second Annual Report of Throbbing Gristle
Grateful Dead: Terrapin Station
Talking Heads: Talking Heads 77
Fleetwood Mac: Rumours
Bootsy Collins: Ahh. The Name is Bootsy, Baby!
Pink Floyd: Animals
Steely Dan: Aja
Elvis Costello: My Aim is True
Motorhead: Motorhead
Television: Marquee Moon
The Clash: The Clash
Lynyrd Skynyrd: Street Survivors
Iggy Pop: Lust for Life
KISS: Love Gun
David Bowie: Low
Scorpions: Virgin Killer
Kansas: Point of No Return
ZZ Top: Tejas
Meat Loaf: Bat Out of Hell
Peter Gabriel: Peter Gabriel
The Tubes: Now
Steve Miller: Book of Dreams
The Jam: This is the Modern World
The Kinks: Sleepwalker
Billy Joel: The Stranger
The Boomtown Rats: The Boomtown Rats
Ted Nugent: Cat Scratch Fever
Heart: Little Queen
Suicide: Suicide
Ultravox: Ultravox
Alan Parsons Project: I Robot
George Thorogood & The Destroyers: George Thorogood & The Destroyers
Ian Drury: New Boots and Panties!!
Randy Newman: Little Criminals
Alice Cooper: Lace & WhiskeySee, this is a great example on how to make a tactful counter-claim, then back it up with good, clean info. Thanks, Rick (and Aubergine).

And yes, '77 was an awesome year, though for the 70's I still prefer '71 & '72. I'm a huge Zep/Sabbath/Purple fan, and in the early 70's they were Kings.

[Jonathan Bogart]

Hell, I even knew it was coming from Bogart. He's notorious for hit-and-run criticism.
Notorious? Really? Because I don't like to beat an argument into the ground? I gave up doing that a long time ago.

I understand your desire to talk about rock exclusively, but I also fundamentally disagree with it. It's not very useful, I think, to erect barriers so that certain kinds of music are off-limits for discussion, especially when inter-genre breeding is so common and even important. (Especially, I'd say, in 1969.)

With that in mind, Bitches Brew, Stand!, and At San Quentin are very, very rock-inflected albums that show how far the influence of the genre had spread. I chose them for that reason.

And rather than keep ranting, here's a more inclusionary list of albums that everyone should listen to, and which made 1969 great:

Miles Davis, In A Silent Way & Bitches Brew
Sly & The Family Stone, Stand!
Johnny Cash, At Folsom Prison
Dusty Springfield, Dusty in Memphis
Bob Dylan, Nashville Skyline
The Band, The Band
Serge Gainsbourg & Jane Birkin, Jane Birkin/Serge Gainsbourg
Gal Costa, Gal Costa
Isaac Hayes, Hot Buttered Soul
The Allman Brothers Band, The Allman Brothers Band
Neil Young & Crazy Horse, Everybody Knows This Is Nowhere
Frank Zappa, Hot Rats
Captain Beefheart & The Magic Band, Trout Mask Replica
Moondog, Moondog
The Grateful Dead, Live/Dead & Aoxomoxoa
The Impressions, The Young Mods' Forgotten Story
Rod Stewart, The Rod Stewart Album
Elvis Presley, From Elvis In Memphis
Nick Garrie, The Nightmare of J.B. Stanislaus
The Sir Douglas Quintet, Mendocino
Sonny Sharrock, Black Woman
Third Ear Band, Alchemy
The Flying Burrito Brothers, The Gilded Palace of Sin
The Bee Gees, Odessa
Toots & the Maytals, Sweet and Dandy
Small Faces, The Autumn Stone
David Axelrod, Songs of Experience
The Isley Brothers, It's Our Thing
James Brown, Say It Loud, I'm Black And I'm Proud
Temptations, Cloud Nine
Julie Driscoll, Brian Auger & The Trinity, Streetnoise
Roberta Flack, First Take
Merle Haggard, Okie from Muskogee
Scott Walker, Scott 3
Tyrannosaurus Rex, Unicorn
Ike & Tina Turner, The Hunter
Joni Mitchell, Clouds
Larry Coryell, Coryell
The MC5, Kick Out the Jams
The Meters, The Meters
Tim Buckley, Happy Sad
Pharoah Sanders, Karma
Nico, The Marble Index
Albert Ayler, Music Is The Healing Force Of The Universe
Amon Duul, Phallus Dei
Can, Monster Movie
Townes Van Zandt, Our Mother The Mountain
Leonard Cohen, Songs From A Room
Charlie Haden, Liberation Music Orchestra
Eddie Palmieri, Champagne
Mott the Hoople, Mott the Hoople
Yes, Yes
Phil Ochs, Rehearsals for Retirement
Terry Riley, Poppy Nogood and the Phantom Band
The Deviants, The Deviants 3
Quicksilver Messenger Service, Happy Trails
Jefferson Airplane, Volunteers
Joe Byrd & the Field Hippies, The American Metaphysical Circus
Art Ensemble of Chicago, A Jackson In Your House
Chicago, The Chicago Transit Authority
Laura Nyro, New York Tendaberry
Santana, Santana
Nick Drake, Five Leaves Left
Willie Colon & Hector Lavoe, Cosa Nuestra
Sun Ra, Atlantis
The Shaggs, Philosophy of the World
Frank Sinatra, Watertown
Gilberto Gil, Gilberto Gil
Soft Machine, Volume Two
Alexander "Skip" Spence, Oar
The Pentangle, Basket of Light
White Noise, An Electric Storm
Procol Harum, A Salty Dog
Os Mutantes, Mutantes
Caetano Veloso, Caetano Veloso
Fairport Convention, Liege & Lief & Unhalfbricking
John McLaughlin, Extrapolation
Fleetwood Mac, Then Play On
Jimmy Cliff, Jimmy Cliff
Kevin Ayers, Joy of a Toy
Silver Apples, Contact
Jorge Ben, Jorge Ben
Janis Joplin, I Got Dem Ol' Kozmic Blues Again Mama!
Harry Nilsson, Harry
Thunderclap Newman, Hollywood Dream
Terry Reid, Terry Reid
Jack Bruce, Songs for a Tailor
Blues Creation, Blues Creation

Still plenty of great rock, and even some great rock & roll, in there. And, really, none of it has no rock influence at all.

[Buried Alien]

Notorious? Really? Because I don't like to beat an argument into the ground? I gave up doing that a long time ago.

I understand your desire to talk about rock exclusively, but I also fundamentally disagree with it.

Yeah, but in a thread that was earmarked *specifically* for rock discussion, isn't it a faux pas of Netiquette to force someone to endure conversation about other genres of music that he doesn't want to discuss presently...in the here and now? It's sort of forcing the thread starter to have his thread derailed, when he really doesn't want to.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[howyadoin]

Still plenty of great rock, and even some great rock & roll, in there. And, really, none of it has no rock influence at all.Now that's a pretty convincing list.

[Brad Barton]

Now that's a pretty convincing list.I agree, great list.

And yes, while I'd generally prefer we stick to Rock....it's a discussion and anything that brings about throught-provoking commentary is a good thing I suppose. Also, so many bands in those days criss-crossed genres (on your list, for instance: Santana or Joplin) that an artist could be relevant in many of them...I guess it's inevitable that Rock discussions will branch out, it's sunch an inclusive genre.

Still, aside from the very comprehensive '69 list, you haven't made much of a case for why the numerous other years you mentioned were better for Rock, which was more what I was interested in hearing.
I'm sure you have very valid points for why 1963 or 1979 was better for Rock than 1969, but for the life of me I can't think of them...

[Jonathan Bogart]

Still, aside from the very comprehensive '69 list, you haven't made much of a case for why the numerous other years you mentioned were better for Rock, which was more what I was interested in hearing.
I'm sure you have very valid points for why 1963 or 1979 was better for Rock than 1969, but for the life of me I can't think of them...
I didn't say they were better for Rock (1967-1970 is pretty hard to beat there, though 1977-1980 comes close), but for Rock & Roll, which is a very different thing. Once the "and roll" is dropped, a lot more experimentation, sophistication, influence from other genres, and general boringness is allowed into the tent. It might be better (depends on your view), but it ain't rock & roll. The Beatles, for example, started as a rock & roll outfit; they ended as a rock outfit. The Stones never quit playing rock & roll, but they threw a lot more on the pile, and in 1969, they were nearly all she wrote for rock & roll. (A couple of Zeppelin tunes, maybe, and the odd "fun" track on various albums, but that's about it.)

Buried hit my 1963 mark pretty well, and jesse my 1979 one. I'm not really invested in this debate to the point that I'm going to Sort By Date in Itunes to give myself more ammunition for disagreeing with you.

[Brad Barton]

I didn't say they were better for Rock (1967-1970 is pretty hard to beat there, though 1977-1980 comes close), but for Rock & Roll, which is a very different thing. Once the "and roll" is dropped, a lot more experimentation, sophistication, influence from other genres, and general boringness is allowed into the tent. It might be better (depends on your view), but it ain't rock & roll. The Beatles, for example, started as a rock & roll outfit; they ended as a rock outfit. The Stones never quit playing rock & roll, but they threw a lot more on the pile, and in 1969, they were nearly all she wrote for rock & roll. (A couple of Zeppelin tunes, maybe, and the odd "fun" track on various albums, but that's about it.)I see where you're coming from, and it's an intriguing thought, but a bit on the semantic side. I'm not arguing that Rock evolved through the 60's and onward, but it's been essentially the same genre from the Chuck Berry days on. Sure, it evolves, it branches out, changes form, but in the end if asked what kind of band the Beatles were, the common man's answer would be "Rock" or "Rock and Roll" or "Rock Music" or some derivative thereof.

Your concept is valid, but think "Rock" in the colloquial sense.

Buried hit my 1963 mark pretty well, and jesse my 1979 one. I'm not really invested in this debate to the point that I'm going to Sort By Date in Itunes to give myself more ammunition for disagreeing with you.Well, I wasn't asking you to break out a referendum or anything, I was genuinely curious as to what your reasoning was. Thought it would bring about some good proposals.

[Jonathan Bogart]

Like I said, I don't disagree that 1969 is a highwater mark for rock. Any competent historian of popular music would have to agree. But you used the phrase "rock & roll" at one point, and I went on one of my patented rants.

I can't believe I forgot the Fields' self-titled album. That both rocks and rawks.

[Ilash]

Notorious? Really? Because I don't like to beat an argument into the ground? I gave up doing that a long time ago.

I understand your desire to talk about rock exclusively, but I also fundamentally disagree with it. It's not very useful, I think, to erect barriers so that certain kinds of music are off-limits for discussion, especially when inter-genre breeding is so common and even important. (Especially, I'd say, in 1969.)

With that in mind, Bitches Brew, Stand!, and At San Quentin are very, very rock-inflected albums that show how far the influence of the genre had spread. I chose them for that reason.

And rather than keep ranting, here's a more inclusionary list of albums that everyone should listen to, and which made 1969 great:

Miles Davis, In A Silent Way & Bitches Brew
Sly & The Family Stone, Stand!
Johnny Cash, At Folsom Prison
Dusty Springfield, Dusty in Memphis
Bob Dylan, Nashville Skyline
The Band, The Band
Serge Gainsbourg & Jane Birkin, Jane Birkin/Serge Gainsbourg
Gal Costa, Gal Costa
Isaac Hayes, Hot Buttered Soul
The Allman Brothers Band, The Allman Brothers Band
Neil Young & Crazy Horse, Everybody Knows This Is Nowhere
Frank Zappa, Hot Rats
Captain Beefheart & The Magic Band, Trout Mask Replica
Moondog, Moondog
The Grateful Dead, Live/Dead & Aoxomoxoa
The Impressions, The Young Mods' Forgotten Story
Rod Stewart, The Rod Stewart Album
Elvis Presley, From Elvis In Memphis
Nick Garrie, The Nightmare of J.B. Stanislaus
The Sir Douglas Quintet, Mendocino
Sonny Sharrock, Black Woman
Third Ear Band, Alchemy
The Flying Burrito Brothers, The Gilded Palace of Sin
The Bee Gees, Odessa
Toots & the Maytals, Sweet and Dandy
Small Faces, The Autumn Stone
David Axelrod, Songs of Experience
The Isley Brothers, It's Our Thing
James Brown, Say It Loud, I'm Black And I'm Proud
Temptations, Cloud Nine
Julie Driscoll, Brian Auger & The Trinity, Streetnoise
Roberta Flack, First Take
Merle Haggard, Okie from Muskogee
Scott Walker, Scott 3
Tyrannosaurus Rex, Unicorn
Ike & Tina Turner, The Hunter
Joni Mitchell, Clouds
Larry Coryell, Coryell
The MC5, Kick Out the Jams
The Meters, The Meters
Tim Buckley, Happy Sad
Pharoah Sanders, Karma
Nico, The Marble Index
Albert Ayler, Music Is The Healing Force Of The Universe
Amon Duul, Phallus Dei
Can, Monster Movie
Townes Van Zandt, Our Mother The Mountain
Leonard Cohen, Songs From A Room
Charlie Haden, Liberation Music Orchestra
Eddie Palmieri, Champagne
Mott the Hoople, Mott the Hoople
Yes, Yes
Phil Ochs, Rehearsals for Retirement
Terry Riley, Poppy Nogood and the Phantom Band
The Deviants, The Deviants 3
Quicksilver Messenger Service, Happy Trails
Jefferson Airplane, Volunteers
Joe Byrd & the Field Hippies, The American Metaphysical Circus
Art Ensemble of Chicago, A Jackson In Your House
Chicago, The Chicago Transit Authority
Laura Nyro, New York Tendaberry
Santana, Santana
Nick Drake, Five Leaves Left
Willie Colon & Hector Lavoe, Cosa Nuestra
Sun Ra, Atlantis
The Shaggs, Philosophy of the World
Frank Sinatra, Watertown
Gilberto Gil, Gilberto Gil
Soft Machine, Volume Two
Alexander "Skip" Spence, Oar
The Pentangle, Basket of Light
White Noise, An Electric Storm
Procol Harum, A Salty Dog
Os Mutantes, Mutantes
Caetano Veloso, Caetano Veloso
Fairport Convention, Liege & Lief & Unhalfbricking
John McLaughlin, Extrapolation
Fleetwood Mac, Then Play On
Jimmy Cliff, Jimmy Cliff
Kevin Ayers, Joy of a Toy
Silver Apples, Contact
Jorge Ben, Jorge Ben
Janis Joplin, I Got Dem Ol' Kozmic Blues Again Mama!
Harry Nilsson, Harry
Thunderclap Newman, Hollywood Dream
Terry Reid, Terry Reid
Jack Bruce, Songs for a Tailor
Blues Creation, Blues Creation

Still plenty of great rock, and even some great rock & roll, in there. And, really, none of it has no rock influence at all.

Wow!

And you still disagree about '69 being one of rock and roll's seminal years?

[Ilash]

I didn't say they were better for Rock (1967-1970 is pretty hard to beat there, though 1977-1980 comes close), but for Rock & Roll, which is a very different thing. Once the "and roll" is dropped, a lot more experimentation, sophistication, influence from other genres, and general boringness is allowed into the tent. It might be better (depends on your view), but it ain't rock & roll. The Beatles, for example, started as a rock & roll outfit; they ended as a rock outfit. The Stones never quit playing rock & roll, but they threw a lot more on the pile, and in 1969, they were nearly all she wrote for rock & roll. (A couple of Zeppelin tunes, maybe, and the odd "fun" track on various albums, but that's about it.)


EDIT: Oh for... I rewrote my whole reply for this because this first take didn't show up until after I posted my second attempt(see below).

Never mind...

[Ilash]

I didn't say they were better for Rock (1967-1970 is pretty hard to beat there, though 1977-1980 comes close), but for Rock & Roll, which is a very different thing. Once the "and roll" is dropped, a lot more experimentation, sophistication, influence from other genres, and general boringness is allowed into the tent. It might be better (depends on your view), but it ain't rock & roll. The Beatles, for example, started as a rock & roll outfit; they ended as a rock outfit. The Stones never quit playing rock & roll, but they threw a lot more on the pile, and in 1969, they were nearly all she wrote for rock & roll. (A couple of Zeppelin tunes, maybe, and the odd "fun" track on various albums, but that's about it.)

It's weird, I actually have a pretty opposite opinion to you. I actually think rock became significantly worse once it lost the "roll", which is in my opinion the more important part of the "rock and roll" equation because, to me, the beauty of rock and roll lies in that irresistible dynamic between rhythm and melody. And for the record, I actually think that the Beatles went from being a straight rock and roll band to a pop (in the widest sense of term) band that at times played rock and roll.

Of course, it is all a matter of semantics and I for one think that rock and roll lasted much longer than you make out. Aside for the Stones, I would easily call the Allman Brothers, The Faces, Deep Purple and CCR rock and roll - and that's just a few examples off the top of my head. There is, however, very little rock and roll on display these days.

Buried hit my 1963 mark pretty well, and jesse my 1979 one. I'm not really invested in this debate to the point that I'm going to Sort By Date in Itunes to give myself more ammunition for disagreeing with you.

My problem with '63 though was that while it was clearly a watershed year for rock and roll, it was only setting the stage for the greatness of the following years. Even '64 seems to be a more obviously great year for rock and roll, from where I'm standing.

[Royal]

While there is no denial that '69 is a great year for music, it's been most often the pavlotic masterbatory response of people with no taste in music, and conservative "classic rock" DJs who can't fucking get over their high school years.

Not that I'm saying the thread starter is either the former or the later.

[The Mirrorball Man]

Rock's greatest year is THIS YEAR. It's always been this year.

Rock'n'roll is about being young and alive, it's not about looking into the rearview mirror, it's not about celebrating the past, and it's not about making fucking lists. I mean, come on.

[rick]

Rock's greatest year is THIS YEAR. It's always been this year.

Rock'n'roll is about being young and alive, it's not about looking into the rearview mirror, it's not about celebrating the past, and it's not about making fucking lists. I mean, come on.


That does sound great, but it really isn't true.

[rick]

See, this is a great example on how to make a tactful counter-claim, then back it up with good, clean info. Thanks, Rick (and Aubergine).

And yes, '77 was an awesome year, though for the 70's I still prefer '71 & '72. I'm a huge Zep/Sabbath/Purple fan, and in the early 70's they were Kings.


One thing about the whole Rock Era is that there is so much truly great music out there, that you can make a "Greatest Year" argument for a whole bunch of years.

[Ilash]

Rock's greatest year is THIS YEAR. It's always been this year.

Rock'n'roll is about being young and alive, it's not about looking into the rearview mirror, it's not about celebrating the past, and it's not about making fucking lists. I mean, come on.

Nope. Sorry, I just couldn't disagree more. Rock and roll is now all about celebrating the past - it's an art form that is well over a half a century old and there is little that is being done now (again, within the form of rock and roll) that wasn't already done years ago. And that's fine but can we please not pretend that rock and roll is as young and fresh as it used to be. And I'm sorry but I think you have to be in a fair amount of denial to actually believe that 2007 has been one of the better years for rock and roll.

On the other hand, if the year was 1966 then yeah, your post would be pretty much irrefutable.

[Aubergine~!]

Still, given how many new Iconic Rock bands got their start in '69, I think that helps it nudge '67 out. As I said before, though, 1965-1973 was a Rock and Roll renassiance, so much great music came out of these 8 years that it's sometimes hard to fully take in.

Have to disagree there. Awesome as 1970 was, 1967 saw debut albums by the Velvet Underground, Pink Floyd, Leonard Cohen, and the Doors. And these are albums that actually were classic debuts, unlike those from Bowie, Elton John, etc.

Still, we can all pretty much agree that 1967 & 1969 were amazing years for music.

[Aubergine~!]

And rather than keep ranting, here's a more inclusionary list of albums that everyone should listen to, and which made 1969 great:

*Long list of good stuff*

Still plenty of great rock, and even some great rock & roll, in there. And, really, none of it has no rock influence at all.

Well damn.

Ok, 1969 wins.

This in an interesting thread though, anyone have any ideas on the best year for music in, say, the 80s & 90s?

[Brad Barton]

Rock's greatest year is THIS YEAR. It's always been this year.

Rock'n'roll is about being young and alive, it's not about looking into the rearview mirror, it's not about celebrating the past, and it's not about making fucking lists. I mean, come on.Yeah, thats a great platitude to throw out there, unfortunately it just doesn't make a lick of sense.

"Don't look at the old stuff, look to tomorrow"? If we didn't look at, study and admire the old stuff how could we ever take influence from anything? For that matter, what would have inspired us to be interested in music anyway? If we were only allowed to "look to tomorrow" then Rock would be pretty doomed at this point, as "Fallout Boy" seems to be it's brightest prospect, which is all kinds of depressing.

Hell, these days to get any Rock that's really decent you almost have to look to the past, if you're ignoring it you have no idea how much excellent music you're missing.

[Brad Barton]

Well damn.

Ok, 1969 wins.

This in an interesting thread though, anyone have any ideas on the best year for music in, say, the 80s & 90s?For the 80's I'd say '86, which was at the very least a killer year for Metal. By the 80's Rock had split into quite a few dominant sub-genres, so it's hard to pin down depending on which you're looking at.

For the 90's - 1992. Everything went down this year. Grunge exploded and brought forth a flood of new ideas -- Or should I say old ideas interpreted in a slightly new way -- And it really was a slight return of the Heavy, blues-infused Rock of the 60's and 70's. The "grunge" movement gets cast aside as an annoying fad at times, but I think it's been Rock's overall strongest showing since the late 60's/early 70's heydey.

[Buried Alien]

My problem with '63 though was that while it was clearly a watershed year for rock and roll, it was only setting the stage for the greatness of the following years.

I disagree. I think the great rock 'n roll of 1963 and 1964 were all good on their own terms, in their own right, irrespective of what they might have been forerunners to.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[elheffe]

For the 90's - 1992. Everything went down this year. Grunge exploded and brought forth a flood of new ideas -- Or should I say old ideas interpreted in a slightly new way -- And it really was a slight return of the Heavy, blues-infused Rock of the 60's and 70's. The "grunge" movement gets cast aside as an annoying fad at times, but I think it's been Rock's overall strongest showing since the late 60's/early 70's heydey.

Actually, I think 1993 was a better year. And i always like to point out that the early 90s wasn't just grunge.

1993 saw:

Pavement - Crooked Rain, Crooked Rain
Smashing Pumpkins - Siamese Dream
Pablo Honey - Radiohead
In Utero - Nirvana
Chrome - Catherine Wheel
Vs. - Pearl Jam
Suede - Suede
Urge Overkill - Saturation
Slowdive - Souvlaki
Mazzy Star - So Tonight That I Might See
Dinosaur Jr. - Where You Been
Rid Of Me - PJ Harvey
The Breeders - Last Splash
The Mighty Mighty Bosstones - Don't Know How To Party
Swervedriver - Mezcal Head
The Reverend Horton Heat - The Full Custom Gospel Sounds of
Independent Worm Saloon - The Butthole Surfers
Paul Westerberg - 14 Songs
Teenage Fanclub - Thirteen
Uncle Tupelo - Anodyne
The Flaming Lips - Transmissions From the Satellite Heart
Frank Black - Frank Black
Belly - Star
Uncle Tupelo - Anodyne
Juliana Hatfield - Become What You Are
Rancid - Rancid
Man or Astroman - Is It ... Man or Astroman?
The Afghan Whigs - Gentlemen
The Boo Radleys - Giant Steps
The Verve - A Storm in Heaven
Saint Etienne - So Tough
New Order - Republic
Grant Lee Buffalo - Fuzzy
Primus - Pork Soda
Southern Culture On The Skids - For Lovers Only
311 - Music
Cracker - Kerosene Hat
Tool - Undertow
The Goo Goo Dolls - Superstar Car Wash
Lenny Kravitz - Are You Going To Go My Way?

[elheffe]

Rock's greatest year is THIS YEAR. It's always been this year.

Rock'n'roll is about being young and alive, it's not about looking into the rearview mirror, it's not about celebrating the past, and it's not about making fucking lists. I mean, come on.

When it comes to old rock, I always liked this lyric from U2: "Don't believe in the 60's The golden age of pop You glorify the past When the future dries up"

And I agree with you to a point. A lot of stuff on beetheb's list is overplayed and I'm sick to death of most of it. But as Jonathan Bogart points out there's a lot of stuff from '69 that's not run into the ground. Stuff like The Band, Leonard Cohen, Os Mutantes, Dusty Springfield, and Harry Nilsson.

[Buried Alien]

Rock's greatest year is THIS YEAR. It's always been this year.

Rock'n'roll is about being young and alive, it's not about looking into the rearview mirror, it's not about celebrating the past.

Perhaps not, but great music should remain great regardless of the composition/recording date. Nothing remains cutting edge forever, but if it's worthy, when its days on the forefront of culture are over, great music becomes part of our cultural heritage. That HERITAGE is worth preserving, celebrating, and being proud of.


Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[leonaozaki]

Actually, I think 1993 was a better year. And i always like to point out that the early 90s wasn't just grunge.



Great list! There were some excellent years for music in the 90's.

rob

[elheffe]

Great list! There were some excellent years for music in the 90's.

rob
The early 90s were the goods. But then again, I'm completely biased, because I was in my early 20s and those feel like my formative years in music.

[leonaozaki]

The early 90s were the goods. But then again, I'm completely biased, because I was in my early 20s and those feel like my formative years in music.

Ha! Same for me. I turned 20 in 1994 and it really felt like the music of the early 90s was, to be cheesy, new and exciting. I'm sure those two facts are connected causally somehow.

rob

[jesse_custer]

I also like early '90s stuff a great deal. Perhaps even moreso if we're talking about rap.

[leonaozaki]

Also, someone earlier mentioned that '63 was when the Stones released "I wanna be Your man", and indeed it was, but it was a Lennon/McCartney composition and the Beatles went on to record it with Ringo on their 2nd (?) album as well.

I know who wrote it. My point is: the Stones' version was considerably different from the Beatles' version, and was responsible for a lot of the louder, more distorted guitar sounds that came along in 1964, after "I Wanna Be Your Man" b/w "Stoned" booted Merseybeat to the margins.

rob

[leonaozaki]

I also like early '90s stuff a great deal. Perhaps even moreso if we're talking about rap.

This must be the first thread where I'm agreeing with Jesse Custer. Innaresting.

rob

[Brad Barton]

I know who wrote it. My point is: the Stones' version was considerably different from the Beatles' version, and was responsible for a lot of the louder, more distorted guitar sounds that came along in 1964, after "I Wanna Be Your Man" b/w "Stoned" booted Merseybeat to the margins.You think? Let's compare (http://youtube.com/watch?v=IW3VYrUvheA).

I dunno, they sound pretty darn similar to me.

Hearing the two versions side by side, the only real differences I hear are the Beatles do it with a slightly faster tempo, and their harmonizing sounds a lot better. Mick's vocals are a little rougher, but otherwise the two are very similar.

[Buried Alien]

I thought the Beatles and Stones versions of "I Wanna Be Your Man" were quite different from one another, and highlighted the differences between the two bands. The Beatles' arrangement was tighter, while the Stones' was looser and more freewheeling. The Stones' version was also more obviously bluesy and ragged (as befits the Stones), and Jagger sang the song with much more menace and style than Ringo did.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[Hellbaby]

Actually, I think 1993 was a better year. And i always like to point out that the early 90s wasn't just grunge.

Good list. I was actually thinking of '91 (Metallica- Black Album, Chili Peppers- Blood Sugar Sex Magic, Pearl Jam- Ten, Nirvana- Nevermind) but I couldn't think of anymore than that. But I think yours beats mines.

[howyadoin]

The early 90s were the goods. But then again, I'm completely biased, because I was in my early 20s and those feel like my formative years in music.
Ha! Same for me. I turned 20 in 1994 and it really felt like the music of the early 90s was, to be cheesy, new and exciting. I'm sure those two facts are connected causally somehow."Every generation reckons the music of the time when it gains social mobility to be the golden years."

~ Ian McDonald, Evolution's Shore

[Aubergine~!]

Actually, I think 1993 was a better year. And i always like to point out that the early 90s wasn't just grunge.

1993 saw:

*snip*

You could also add Suede's debut to that list.

Now for 1994:

Definitely Maybe
Parklife
Bee Thousand
Illmatic
The Downward Spiral
Crooked Rain, Crooked Rain (initially released in 1994)

Plus whatever I'm forgetting, as I don't have my IPod on hand.

[elheffe]

You could also add Suede's debut to that list.
Actually, I did. Seventh one down.

[elheffe]

"Every generation reckons the music of the time when it gains social mobility to be the golden years."

~ Ian McDonald, Evolution's Shore

Oh, no doubt. There's good music coming out every year.

[berk]

"Every generation reckons the music of the time when it gains social mobility to be the golden years."

~ Ian McDonald, Evolution's ShoreNo wonder my taste is so shagged up - I've never been socially mobile.

[Brad Barton]

I thought the Beatles and Stones versions of "I Wanna Be Your Man" were quite different from one another, and highlighted the differences between the two bands. The Beatles' arrangement was tighter, while the Stones' was looser and more freewheeling. The Stones' version was also more obviously bluesy and ragged (as befits the Stones), and Jagger sang the song with much more menace and style than Ringo did.See, this is where our interpretation differs -- You say the Stones played it "more bluesy and ragged", to me they just played it a slower, sloppier, and a little more awkwardly. Watching the Beatles perform it live; Everyone's right there with the beat, the guitars are in great syncopation and the singing (even Ringo) is in key and harmonized very well.

Of course, I'm a rabid Beatles fan so that probably colors my opinion, but their performance (of the song they wrote, BTW) just sounded so much better than the Stones' to my ears. Putting them back-to-back like that really brought out not only the distinct differences between the two bands, but also some startling similarities they had back in the earliest days of the British Invasion.

Good list. I was actually thinking of '91 (Metallica- Black Album, Chili Peppers- Blood Sugar Sex Magic, Pearl Jam- Ten, Nirvana- Nevermind) but I couldn't think of anymore than that. But I think yours beats mines.Yeah, maybe '91 was the year I was thinking of, actually. I had Nirvana's Nevermind and The Black Album in mind as I wrote '92, but you're right, they were all '91.

But it's good to see we more or less have a consensus on 1969. All these little lists we've been compiling for various other years, and still the sheer wealth of truly classic material doesn't quite reach '69 heights.

[Brad Barton]

"Every generation reckons the music of the time when it gains social mobility to be the golden years."

~ Ian McDonald, Evolution's ShoreTo some dgree that is very true, but there are exceptions as you go on through life.

If the music I was listening to when I gained "social mobility" was still prevalent in my mind, I'd still be a rabid Spin Doctors fan...sometimes the music of our childhood sticks with us, and sometimes the fads of our childhood fade as the years go on.

However, I know all the bands I loved then as well as now, and yeah I still have a sentimentally sweet spot for most of those select few in my heart.

[Buried Alien]

See, this is where our interpretation differs -- You say the Stones played it "more bluesy and ragged", to me they just played it a slower, sloppier, and a little more awkwardly. Watching the Beatles perform it live; Everyone's right there with the beat, the guitars are in great syncopation and the singing (even Ringo) is in key and harmonized very well.

Of course, I'm a rabid Beatles fan so that probably colors my opinion, but their performance (of the song they wrote, BTW) just sounded so much better than the Stones' to my ears. Putting them back-to-back like that really brought out not only the distinct differences between the two bands, but also some startling similarities they had back in the earliest days of the British Invasion.



I like the Stones' studio version of "I Wanna Be Your Man" slightly better than the Beatles' studio version of the song, but the best version *ever* that I've heard of it was the Beatles' performance of the song at the Washington Coliseum in February, 1964. On that performance, at least, the Beatles were able to out-ragged the Stones (in a good way). Ringo rocked out that night. The whole band did. Years later, each of the Beatles remembered the Washington Coliseum show as one of the best gigs they ever did.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[howyadoin]

See, this is where our interpretation differs -- You say the Stones played it "more bluesy and ragged", to me they just played it a slower, sloppier, and a little more awkwardly.You wouldn't equate "ragged" and "sloppy"?

[Brad Barton]

You wouldn't equate "ragged" and "sloppy"?Eh, not really, not in the sense B.A. was using it.
Same allusion, different connotations.

I like the Stones' studio version of "I Wanna Be Your Man" slightly better than the Beatles' studio version of the song, but the best version *ever* that I've heard of it was the Beatles' performance of the song at the Washington Coliseum in February, 1964. On that performance, at least, the Beatles were able to out-ragged the Stones (in a good way). Ringo rocked out that night. The whole band did. Years later, each of the Beatles remembered the Washington Coliseum show as one of the best gigs they ever did.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)Damn, you're right. It didn't dawn on me till you said it and I watched it again; that video was comparing a live recording to a studio recording.

I'd bet the Beatles' live version is a lot "smokier" than the video there, both Paul and John had very soulful voices when singing live.

[leonaozaki]

You think? Let's compare (http://youtube.com/watch?v=IW3VYrUvheA).

I dunno, they sound pretty darn similar to me.

Hearing the two versions side by side, the only real differences I hear are the Beatles do it with a slightly faster tempo, and their harmonizing sounds a lot better. Mick's vocals are a little rougher, but otherwise the two are very similar.

Well, then there's the small fact that the version you've linked there compares a complete Beatles recording of the song to an incomplete Stones recording. The clip edits out Brian's guitar solo, which, along with Wyman's bass playing on the song and Mick's singing as BA has already noted, does, at least to my ears, make the two versions very different. Harrison's solo is very clean, while Brian's, which isn't on the clip, is much more fuzzed out.

So if we're going to be using this kind of evidence let's try and ensure that both sides get fairly represented.

rob

[leonaozaki]

Yes.

That's your answer to my question as to whether "Space Oddity" is better known than "Ziggy Stardust," "Changes," "Rebel Rebel" or "Let's Dance." What's your evidence?


First of all, Cash is country, so he wouldn't be included.


You don't think rockers in the 60's weren't listening to Johnny Cash? And that Johnny Cash wasn't listening to rock music?

Oh, and Johnny Cash is more rock and roll than 90% of the original list


The thread is pretty overtly about 1969, so no, the goalposts are still planted firmly in place.

How is it arbitrary if I've made an effort to explain it? I'd say throwing out a year at random with no support of any kind behind it, as some of you've been doing, is a hell of a lot more arbitrary than stating a year then giving evidence to support it.

And please, go ahead and argue that 1965-1973, ('69 in particular) weren't crucially significant years in Rock history. Then I'll know you're just disagreeing to be argumentative.



See, you moved the goalposts right there. First the thread is about 1969, then in the third paragraph it's about 1965-1973. It's a convenient rhetorical device because anytime someone claims that 1965 or 1966 or 1967 were more important years (as I'm about to do) you can just lump them into your argument about 1969.


Of course 1965-1973 are crucially important. But that's not what you originally claimed. Anyway, to my ears, 1963-1967 are the seminal years from that decade. To me, they seem to be the years of greater experimentation and excitement within the genre of rock and roll, when compared to 1968-73. Although those years produced lots of great music, and many albums I enjoy, they seem in general to be about consolidation rather than innovation (except for Led Zep and Bowie, of course) and the music, overall, just doesn't sound as fresh, or optimistic, or quite as exciting.

rob

[leonaozaki]

"Every generation reckons the music of the time when it gains social mobility to be the golden years."

~ Ian McDonald, Evolution's Shore

Ha ha ha! Very true. But at some point in my late 20's I recognized that and have been trying to get beyond it.

rob

[Brad Barton]

That's your answer to my question as to whether "Space Oddity" is better known than "Ziggy Stardust," "Changes," "Rebel Rebel" or "Let's Dance." What's your evidence?Oh, I have none whasoever (which you know), but what's yours that it isn't?

There is none, exactly. It's called conjecture.

You don't think rockers in the 60's weren't listening to Johnny Cash?(I love answering rhetorical questions, it's so cheeky) Sure they were.
And that Johnny Cash wasn't listening to rock music?Sure he was.
Oh, and Johnny Cash is more rock and roll than 90% of the original listRock and Roll at times? Yes.
"More Rock and Roll than 90% of this list"? Not in your wildest dreams.

He played Country music with a Rock and Roll attitude. Not the same thing.

See, you moved the goalposts right there...Of course 1965-1973 are crucially important. But that's not what you originally claimed.Jesus christ, did your parents not hug you enough as a child? You essentially agree with me, yet you're still playing this half-assed game of "gotcha".

I've made a strong case for '69, remember the opening post? and saying '65-'73 was a great time for music isn't "moving the goalposts" (CBR's new most popular phrase), because I wasn't making an argument for the period. It's a discussion thread, I was discussing.

The "goalposts" are standing where they always were, you're the one who decided to kick the ball into the sidelines in an effort to needlessly challenge me (again).

[rick]

I think that it's about time to move this conversation back on track.

Another really good year for music, rock and otherwise was 1970.

It’s an interesting year for me anyway because there is not only some great rock albums that came out, but some classic “crossover” albums too.

For example, even though Bitches Brew by Miles Davis, is most definitely a Jazz album, it is really hard not to include it in the Rock category also. Funkadelic’s, Free Your Mind and Your Ass Will Follow or James Brown’s, Sex Machine certainly are crossover albums too.

And I have to say that it is really a tribute to the ingenuity and creativity of the rockers of that era that their innovations influenced so many other genres.

So, with that in mind, some of my favorite “Rock” albums from 1970 include….


Let it Be – The Beatles (the original, and in my opinion, superior, Phil Spector mix)
After the Gold Rush – Neil Young
The Man Who Sold the World – David Bowie
Loaded – The Velvet Underground
The Point – Harry Nilsson
Morrison Hotel – The Doors
Band of Gypsys – Jimi Hendrix
Layla – Derek & the Dominoes
Curtis – Curtis Mayield
Workingmans Dead – Grateful Dead
American Beauty – Grateful Dead
Zeppelin III – Led Zeppelin
Pearl – Jamis Joplin
American Woman – The Guess Who
Tea For the Tillerman – Cat Stevens
Fun House – The Stooges
Sunflower – Beach Boys
Easy Action – Alice Cooper
All Things Must Pass – George Harrison
Benefit – Jethro Tull
Atom Heart Mother – Pink Floyd
Live at Leeds – The Who
Moondance – Van Morrison
Paranoid – Black Sabbath
The Isaac Hayes Movement – Isaac Hayes
Weasel Ripped My Flesh – Frank Zappa

[leonaozaki]

I think that it's about time to move this conversation back on track.

Another really good year for music, rock and otherwise was 1970.

It’s an interesting year for me anyway because there is not only some great rock albums that came out, but some classic “crossover” albums too.



I can't get behind Cat Stevens or the Guess Who but everything else on your list is excellent. Good stuff.

Well, I guess I can't get behind Let it Be either (although I agree the Phil Spector mix is superior). It's funny; it used to be my favorite Beatles album behind the "White Album." But now the more I listen to Help and Rubber Soul and Revolver the less I like it. Oh well. It's still the Beatles.

rob
rob

[rick]

I can't get behind Cat Stevens or the Guess Who but everything else on your list is excellent. Good stuff.

Well, I guess I can't get behind Let it Be either (although I agree the Phil Spector mix is superior). It's funny; it used to be my favorite Beatles album behind the "White Album." But now the more I listen to Help and Rubber Soul and Revolver the less I like it. Oh well. It's still the Beatles.


rob


I freely admit to a serious perverse love of pop.

At least I didn't add on Seals & Crofts. :)

[Brad Barton]

Let it Be – The Beatles (the original, and in my opinion, superior, Phil Spector mix)Hmm...now you've got me curious.

How was the Spector mix different? I've heard much about it, but I'm not exactly sure if the Let it Be I've heard is the "Spector mix" or some other mix. :confused:

[Jonathan Bogart]

Hmm...now you've got me curious.

How was the Spector mix different? I've heard much about it, but I'm not exactly sure if the Let it Be I've heard is the "Spector mix" or some other mix. :confused:
Phil Spector was the producer of the originally released Let It Be. Rick was just comparing it to the recent Naked mix that McCartney claims is how he wanted the album to sound.

[Brad Barton]

Phil Spector was the producer of the originally released Let It Be. Rick was just comparing it to the recent Naked mix that McCartney claims is how he wanted the album to sound.So I'm assuming the Naked mix just had less ear candy, or...?

I'm trying to get a handle on which one I'm familiar with. The version I'm thinking of is on the "Blue" album (The Beatles 1967-1970, I believe it's called)...which is the Spector mix, right?

[Patriot07]

Rock and Roll at times? Yes.
"More Rock and Roll than 90% of this list"? Not in your wildest dreams.

He played Country music with a Rock and Roll attitude. Not the same thing.

He invented the rock and roll attitude along with Jerry Lee Lewis. He's as much rock and roll as everybody else. He was rocker who did country. Not the other way around.

[Jonathan Bogart]

So I'm assuming the Naked mix just had less ear candy, or...?

I'm trying to get a handle on which one I'm familiar with. The version I'm thinking of is on the "Blue" album (The Beatles 1967-1970, I believe it's called)...which is the Spector mix, right?
Oh, you're thinking of the song? The single version which is on the Blue Album is a slightly different mix than from the actual Let It Be album (the solo in particular is different), but the version from Let It Be...Naked is much more stripped down and, to many ears, less effective.

[rick]

So I'm assuming the Naked mix just had less ear candy, or...?

I'm trying to get a handle on which one I'm familiar with. The version I'm thinking of is on the "Blue" album (The Beatles 1967-1970, I believe it's called)...which is the Spector mix, right?


Yes, that is the Spector mix.

[elheffe]

Let it Be – The Beatles (the original, and in my opinion, superior, Phil Spector mix)
After the Gold Rush – Neil Young
The Man Who Sold the World – David Bowie
Loaded – The Velvet Underground
The Point – Harry Nilsson
Morrison Hotel – The Doors
Band of Gypsys – Jimi Hendrix
Layla – Derek & the Dominoes
Curtis – Curtis Mayield
Workingmans Dead – Grateful Dead
American Beauty – Grateful Dead
Zeppelin III – Led Zeppelin
Pearl – Jamis Joplin
American Woman – The Guess Who
Tea For the Tillerman – Cat Stevens
Fun House – The Stooges
Sunflower – Beach Boys
Easy Action – Alice Cooper
All Things Must Pass – George Harrison
Benefit – Jethro Tull
Atom Heart Mother – Pink Floyd
Live at Leeds – The Who
Moondance – Van Morrison
Paranoid – Black Sabbath
The Isaac Hayes Movement – Isaac Hayes
Weasel Ripped My Flesh – Frank Zappa


Speaking of Cat Stevens, why not Mona Bone Jakon? That came out in 1970, too. That one's great.

[twilight]

Regarding Bowie,I've always considered "Changes" his song.

Even if you don't know the man or the song damn near everybody recognizes "ch-ch-ch-ch-changes".

-Twi

[Brad Barton]

EDIT: Moved post to appropriate thread.

Judging by these last few pages, it looks like the Beatles Thread needs a bump anyway.

[jessecuster3]

Well damn.

Ok, 1969 wins.

This in an interesting thread though, anyone have any ideas on the best year for music in, say, the 80s & 90s?

You could also add Suede's debut to that list.

Now for 1994:

Definitely Maybe
Parklife
Bee Thousand
Illmatic
The Downward Spiral
Crooked Rain, Crooked Rain (initially released in 1994)

Plus whatever I'm forgetting, as I don't have my IPod on hand.

I think I might say '95, actually

Oasis - What's The Story Morning Glory
Blur - The Great Escape
Pulp - Different Class
Radiohead - The Bends
Supergrass - I Should Coco
Black grape - Its Great When You're Straight, Yeah
Spacehog - Resident Alien
Elastica - s/t
The Charlatans UK - s/t
Smashing Pumpkins - Mellon Collie And The Infinite Sadness
The Flaming Lips - Clouds Taste Metallic
Green Day - Insomniac
Rancid - ...And Out Come The Wolves
Red Hot Chili Peppers - One Hot Minute
Alanis Morrisette - Jagged Little Pill

[Buried Alien]

1970 was an era-ending year in pop/rock music. Not just the literal end of the decade, but a watershed considering which acts were breaking up or dying during that calendar year:

1. The Beatles (disbanded)

2. The Supremes (disbanded)

3. Simon and Garfunkel (disbanded)

4. Jimi Hendrix (died)

5. Janis Joplin (died)

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[jesse_custer]

Mellon Collie ...

Should have been about eight or nine songs long.

[Buried Alien]

Re: "Let It Be"

I frankly preferred the "Naked" version to either the 1969 Glyn Johns/George Martin produced-single or the 1970 Phil Spector produced-album version. The "Naked" version featured more of George Harrison's guitar and Billy Preston's keyboards (beyond the instrumental breaks in the middle of the song) in the final verses, which is a plus to me. Can't get too much of Harrison's guitar-playing and Preston's keyboard-playing.

"The Long and Winding Road" was even better in its "Naked" version.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[jessecuster3]

Mellon Collie ...

Should have been about eight or nine songs long.

As far as I am concerned, it should have been about 2 or 3 and the rest b-sides from Cherub Rock. But, you cannot deny it was a huge part of 1995.

[jesse_custer]

Oh yeah, it was huge. Just not sure if its cultural relevance for that particular year is going to be enough for future generations to consider it a good album.

But what do I know. I still consider Gish their best effort.

[jessecuster3]

But what do I know. I still consider Gish their best effort.

You are a very smart man! Cherub Rock was an excellent album, though.

[jesse_custer]

Waitaminute. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't "Cherub Rock" a single and not an album? Wasn't it on Siamese Dream?

[jessecuster3]

Waitaminute. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't "Cherub Rock" a single and not an album? Wasn't it on Siamese Dream?

Right, right, I am terrible with album names.

[elheffe]

I think I might say '95, actually

Oasis - What's The Story Morning Glory
Blur - The Great Escape
Pulp - Different Class
Radiohead - The Bends
Supergrass - I Should Coco
Black grape - Its Great When You're Straight, Yeah
Spacehog - Resident Alien
Elastica - s/t
The Charlatans UK - s/t
Smashing Pumpkins - Mellon Collie And The Infinite Sadness
The Flaming Lips - Clouds Taste Metallic
Green Day - Insomniac
Rancid - ...And Out Come The Wolves
Red Hot Chili Peppers - One Hot Minute
Alanis Morrisette - Jagged Little Pill

'95, to me, wasn't the greatest year. I mean, there was still some amazing music that came out that year like Guided By Voices' Alien Lanes, Beck's Odelay, Radiohead's The Bends, The Foo Fighter's Self-Titled, The Verve's Northern Soul, Jawbreaker's Dear You and Rancid's ...And Out Come The Wolves. But RHCP's One Hot Minute was pretty lackluster, Mellon Collie was bloated, Alanis Morrisette was all over, and it seemed that U2 songs "Hold Me, Thrill Me, Kiss Me, Kill Me" was played non-stop.

[jesse_custer]

I know it's not rock (but influenced by rock? no doubt). But my vote for best record of 1995 would go to Me Against the World by Tupac.

[howyadoin]

I think I might say '95, actually

Alanis Morrisette - Jagged Little PillTalk about not backing up your claim...

[rick]

Talk about not backing up your claim...

There was this lady who worked with me at the record store who loved that album.

She claimed that it was totally empowering.

However, she got pissed when I pointed out to her, that if she reversed the sexes of the people in the song it suddenly becomes clear that it was a song about a crazy stalker.

[howyadoin]

There was this lady who worked with me at the record store who loved that album.

She claimed that it was totally empowering.

However, she got pissed when I pointed out to her, that if she reversed the sexes of the people in the song it suddenly becomes clear that it was a song about a crazy stalker.Not to mention that it was Dave Coulier who she was blowing in the movie theater.

No wonder she kept it a secret. Imagine what it'd have done for her "rock" cred if this doofus's face had been associated with the song when it came out:

http://www.writersdigest.com/writerslife/content/binary/2dave_coulier.jpg

[rick]

Not to mention that it was Dave Coulier who she was blowing in the movie theater.

No wonder she kept it a secret. Imagine what it'd have done for her "rock" cred if this doofus's face had been associated with the song when it came out:

http://www.writersdigest.com/writerslife/content/binary/2dave_coulier.jpg

That is clearly the funniest thing I have heard all day.

[Ilash]

Re: "Let It Be"

I frankly preferred the "Naked" version to either the 1969 Glyn Johns/George Martin produced-single or the 1970 Phil Spector produced-album version. The "Naked" version featured more of George Harrison's guitar and Billy Preston's keyboards (beyond the instrumental breaks in the middle of the song) in the final verses, which is a plus to me. Can't get too much of Harrison's guitar-playing and Preston's keyboard-playing.

"The Long and Winding Road" was even better in its "Naked" version.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

I like the single version the most. The original suffers from really messy Phil Spector production even if it has arguably the best guitar solo of the lot. The Naked version is great except that they have changed the end of the song. With the other versions, there is a clear dramatic shift (I'm not clear on music theory but is it a key change?) in the line "And when the night is cloudy..." - possibly my favourite moment in the whole song - that is wholly absent on the Naked version.

[Buried Alien]

I like the single version the most. The original suffers from really messy Phil Spector production even if it has arguably the best guitar solo of the lot. The Naked version is great except that they have changed the end of the song. With the other versions, there is a clear dramatic shift (I'm not clear on music theory but is it a key change?) in the line "And when the night is cloudy..." - possibly my favourite moment in the whole song - that is wholly absent on the Naked version.

That line is still there on the NAKED version. The NAKED version basically is the single version with more George Harrison Rosewood Telecaster electric guitar and more Billy Preston electric keyboards.

What *was* disappointing about the NAKED version, however, is that they omitted the extra verse that was heard in the version performed in the LET IT BE movie: "There will be no sorrow, let it be."

That was such a great line that I've always wondered why it was never included on the officially released versions of the song.

As for the album (Phil Spector) version: the guitar solo was rockin', but didn't fit the song.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[Brad Barton]

As for the album (Phil Spector) version: the guitar solo was rockin', but didn't fit the song.After listening to "Let it Be" - Spector mix vs. Naked mix (http://youtube.com/watch?v=1ecAr2NWsvg), I can safely say I like the Naked mix much better.

The Spector mix just has too much going on, when in actuality the songs emotion comes across much more effectively through Pauls voice and piano. The orchestration is downright gaudy in some places.

I believe the "Naked" version is on Anthology 3 as well, which in retrospect is the version I'm familiar with. The Blue album version I heard when I was very young, but the Anthology 3 album I obsessed over for a few months in my later teenage years, so it's the one I have on mental hard-drive.

[Buried Alien]

After listening to "Let it Be" - Spector mix vs. Naked mix (http://youtube.com/watch?v=1ecAr2NWsvg), I can safely say I like the Naked mix much better.

The Spector mix just has too much going on, when in actuality the songs emotion comes across much more effectively through Pauls voice and piano. The orchestration is downright gaudy in some places.

I believe the "Naked" version is on Anthology 3 as well, which in retrospect is the version I'm familiar with. The Blue album version I heard when I was very young, but the Anthology 3 album I obsessed over for a few months in my later teenage years, so it's the one I have on mental hard-drive.

The version on ANTHOLOGY (the album, not the video, which just used footage from the LET IT BE movie) was just a demo version...not complete and with obvious flaws. It's stripped down to be sure, but sounds nothing like a final recording suitable for commercial release. It was an outtake from when the Beatles were still experimenting with the song. I don't think McCartney even had the final verse of the song nailed down yet at that point.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[Ilash]

The version on ANTHOLOGY (the album, not the video, which just used footage from the LET IT BE movie) was just a demo version...not complete and with obvious flaws. It's stripped down to be sure, but sounds nothing like a final recording suitable for commercial release. It was an outtake from when the Beatles were still experimenting with the song. I don't think McCartney even had the final verse of the song nailed down yet at that point.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

Yup. That very verse that I was referring to above isn't in that version at all, as far as I remember. Just to clarify though, I didn't mean that the line wasn't in the Naked version, just that the tonal shift isn't really evident. In the earlier versions the way it was sung and arranged made it sound like that verse was the climax of the song whereas on the Naked version, it sounds just like the rest of the verses. It's a very small, subtle change but it makes all the difference in the world.

[Brad Barton]

The version on ANTHOLOGY (the album, not the video, which just used footage from the LET IT BE movie) was just a demo version...not complete and with obvious flaws. It's stripped down to be sure, but sounds nothing like a final recording suitable for commercial release. It was an outtake from when the Beatles were still experimenting with the song. I don't think McCartney even had the final verse of the song nailed down yet at that point.No, you're right, it was still a very rough version. Still, it sounded much closer to the Naked mix than it did the Spector mix.

How does Get Back sound in it's Naked form?

[Buried Alien]

No, you're right, it was still a very rough version. Still, it sounded much closer to the Naked mix than it did the Spector mix.

How does Get Back sound in it's Naked form?

"Get Back" the song? Not very different. Phil Spector didn't do much to the rock 'n roll tracks on the album...just the three ballads ("Let It Be," "The Long and Winding Road," and "Across the Universe").

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[Ilash]

"Get Back" the song? Not very different. Phil Spector didn't do much to the rock 'n roll tracks on the album...just the three ballads ("Let It Be," "The Long and Winding Road," and "Across the Universe").

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

True but the new remastering gives all the songs much more of a kick than they had on the original CD releases. I've Got a Feeling is especially improved.

[leonaozaki]

Jesus christ, did your parents not hug you enough as a child?


Damn, so that explains all of my personal problems!

rob

[leonaozaki]

Actually, I think 1993 was a better year. And i always like to point out that the early 90s wasn't just grunge.



In addition to your list, which is mighty, I should also add: Lisa Germano, Happiness. What a great record.

rob

[Brad Barton]

Just to make the case for 1991 a little stronger (sticking to mainly Rock):

The Soul Cages - Sting
Divinyls - Divinyls
Uncle Anesthesia - Screaming Trees
Green Mind - Dinosaur Jr
1916 - Motörhead
Out of Time - R.E.M
Ribbed - NOFX
Flashpoint (Live) - The Rolling Stones
The Best Band You Never Heard in Your Life (live) - Frank Zappa
Temple of the Dog - Temple of the Dog
Mighty Like a Rose - Elvis Costello
Sailing the Seas of Cheese - Primus
Gish - The Smashing Pumpkins
Slow, Deep and Hard - Type O Negative
For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge - Van Halen
Attack of the Killer B's - Anthrax
Into the Great Wide Open - Tom Petty
Steady Diet of Nothing - Fugazi
The Black Album - Metallica
Cypress Hill - Cypress Hill
Pocket Full of Kryptonite - Spin Doctors
Leisure - Blur
fear - Toad the Wet Sprocket
Ten - Pearl Jam
Roll the Bones - Rush
Travelers and Thieves - Blues Traveler
On Every Street - Dire Straits
No More Tears - Ozzy Osbourne
Use Your Illusion's I & II - Guns N' Roses
Mad Mad World - Tom Cochrane
Blood Sugar Sex Magik - Red Hot Chili Peppers
Ceremony - The Cult
Nevermind - Nirvana
Diamonds and Pearls - Prince & the New Power Generation
Miscellaneous T - They Might Be Giants
Trompe le Monde - Pixies
Badmotorfinger - Soundgarden
The Plague That Makes Your Booty Move - Infectious Grooves
As Ugly as They Wanna Be - Ugly Kid Joe
Mr. Bad Example - Warren Zevon
Girlfriend - Matthew Sweet
Human - Death
Pennywise - Pennywise
Necroticism - Carcass (Metalheads will get this one)
We Can't Dance - Genesis
Achtung Baby - U2
Beckology - Jeff Beck
Bullhead - The Melvins
The Nymphs - The Nymphs


Bands Started in 1991:
AFI
Candlebox
Cradle of Filth
Dave Matthews Band
Incubus
Local H
Nevermore
Oasis
Powerman 5000
Radiohead
Rage Against the Machine
Rancid
Stabbing Westward
Tori Amos
Vertical Horizon

So: A huge number of bands had their absolute biggest albums this year, including Metallica, Pearl jam, Nirvana, Ozzy, Guns n' Roses, U2 and a few others. Plus it was a great year for smaller, more indie stuff.

[Buried Alien]

What's really funny about 1991 being yet another watershed year for rock is that just the previous year (1990), pop writers were bemoaning the "death of rock" as acts such as New Kids on the Block, Vanilla Ice, MC Hammer, Milli Vanilli, and the last and weakest of the hair metal generation bands dominated MTV and the pop charts. What a difference a year makes, eh?

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[Brad Barton]

What's really funny about 1991 being yet another watershed year for rock is that just the previous year (1990), pop writers were bemoaning the "death of rock" as acts such as New Kids on the Block, Vanilla Ice, MC Hammer, Milli Vanilli, and the last and weakest of the hair metal generation bands dominated MTV and the pop charts. What a difference a year makes, eh?Well, I sure hope we have a watershed year for Rock around the corner here in the near future, because the genre, at it's purest form, is hurting pretty bad right now.

Looking at the '91 list, do you think we may have a contender for best overall year?

'69 vs. '91. Now that is a tough call.

[howyadoin]

Well, I sure hope we have a watershed year for Rock around the corner here in the near future, because the genre, at it's purest form, is hurting pretty bad right now.

Looking at the '91 list, do you think we may have a contender for best overall year? Great year, no question. Revolutionary year (the way 69 was)? I'm not so sure.

[leonaozaki]

What's really funny about 1991 being yet another watershed year for rock is that just the previous year (1990), pop writers were bemoaning the "death of rock" as acts such as New Kids on the Block, Vanilla Ice, MC Hammer, Milli Vanilli, and the last and weakest of the hair metal generation bands dominated MTV and the pop charts. What a difference a year makes, eh?

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

Two thoughts:

1) The rumors of the Death of Rock are always, always, always greatly exaggerated (sorry for the obvious reference!), especially in the mainstream press.

2) When I was actually living through 1991, I agree...it did seem like a watershed year. But then when I started listening to the more left-of-the-dial groups, 1991 didn't seem like such a breakout year anymore. To put it another way: there was a lot of great music in the late 80's and 1990; it just wasn't being played on the radio or MTV.

rob

[leonaozaki]

Great year, no question. Revolutionary year (the way 69 was)? I'm not so sure.

In the interests of opening up the discussion: would 1965, 1966, or 1967 be considered still more revolutionary than 1969? Just a thought.

rob

[mattx110]

In the interests of opening up the discussion: would 1965, 1966, or 1967 be considered still more revolutionary than 1969? Just a thought.

rob
Jerry Garcia went to the moon in 1968. It took a year for NASA to catch up.

[Jonathan Bogart]

In the interests of opening up the discussion: would 1965, 1966, or 1967 be considered still more revolutionary than 1969? Just a thought.
'66. Revolver, the first Velvet Underground and Mothers of Invention records, the Kinks get introspective and invent indie rock, and Coltrane catches his breath before ascending into heaven. Off the top of my head.

Oh, and Stax-Volt enters its can-do-no-wrong period.

[howyadoin]

left-of-the-dialHah. Big points to you.

In the interests of opening up the discussion: would 1965, 1966, or 1967 be considered still more revolutionary than 1969? Just a thought.Jonathan makes a pretty good case for 66. I'd say 67 has a pretty solid shot at it, too.

[Ilash]

Wait, wasn't the Velvet's first album a 1967 release? Otherwise, I would probably agree with '66 too - even if just as strong a case could bemade for the years that surround it.

[Brad Barton]

'66. Revolver, the first Velvet Underground and Mothers of Invention records, the Kinks get introspective and invent indie rock, and Coltrane catches his breath before ascending into heaven. Off the top of my head.

Oh, and Stax-Volt enters its can-do-no-wrong period.'66 was an excellent year, no doubt, but was it as "cross-generational" as '69? As B.A. said earlier, 1970 was the end of an era, in many respects, in that so many of the eras legends died and/or fizzled out....so wouldn't '69 and '70 have literally been the only years you could have heard a new Zeppelin alongside new Beatles, A new Doors alongside new Stones, or a new Kinks alongside new Bowie, etc.?

In my mind, '69 wasn't just great for all the legenadary music that was released, but for how all-encompassing a year it was.

Oh, and let's not forget Woodstock, something that's barely been touched on. No, it didn't do much for music as an art-form, but it did a hell of a lot for music's image at the time, plus it's universally recognized as one of the biggest concerts in history.

[Aubergine~!]

'66 was an excellent year, no doubt, but was it as "cross-generational" as '69? As B.A. said earlier, 1970 was the end of an era, in many respects, in that so many of the eras legends died and/or fizzled out....so wouldn't '69 and '70 have literally been the only years you could have heard a new Zeppelin alongside new Beatles, A new Doors alongside new Stones, or a new Kinks alongside new Bowie, etc.?

At the time, I'm sure it was thrilling, but in hindsight, everything's old.

And besides, even if say, we were back in that era, no one would've been too excited about a debut album from some artist no one had ever heard of.

[leonaozaki]

'66. Revolver, the first Velvet Underground and Mothers of Invention records, the Kinks get introspective and invent indie rock, and Coltrane catches his breath before ascending into heaven. Off the top of my head.

Oh, and Stax-Volt enters its can-do-no-wrong period.

Also we should put a little record from folksinger Bobby Zimmerman on that list.

rob

[leonaozaki]

'66 was an excellent year, no doubt, but was it as "cross-generational" as '69? As B.A. said earlier, 1970 was the end of an era, in many respects, in that so many of the eras legends died and/or fizzled out....so wouldn't '69 and '70 have literally been the only years you could have heard a new Zeppelin alongside new Beatles, A new Doors alongside new Stones, or a new Kinks alongside new Bowie, etc.?


The Doors released The Doors and Strange Days in 1967, the same year that the Beatles released Sgt Pepper's and Magical Mystery Tour, and also the same year that the Stones released Between the Buttons, Flowers and Their Satantic Majesties Request.

The Kinks released Something Else in '67, the same year as David Bowie's first album.

It was also the year of The Velvet Underground and Nico and White Light/White Heat.

Also in that year Dylan and the Band started recording the material that would later become known as The Basement Tapes. The bootleg of that material, "The Great White Wonder," would become enormously influential on much of rock music from 1968-70.

Lastly, the Monterey Pop Festival was in 1967. It's at least as important as Woodstock, I think.

rob

[mattx110]

I think I'm going to come by and start evangelizing for 1968 and 1973 later. Small preview, Elvis Presley Comeback Special, Brinsley Shwarz, Pat Garett and Hunky Dory...

[leonaozaki]

I think I'm going to come by and start evangelizing for 1968 and 1973 later. Small preview, Elvis Presley Comeback Special, Brinsley Shwarz, Pat Garett and Hunky Dory...

Hunky Dory came out in 1971.

rob

[Jonathan Bogart]

And Brinsley Schwarz's debut was 1972. Great record.

[mattx110]

Hunky Dory came out in 1971.

rob
really?

wow, i coulda sworn... oh well.

And Brinsley swartz had a better hit in 1973. Unless I got that year wrong too, which I might have...

Elvis in 1968 still counts. Let me think over this with my itunes.

[howyadoin]

Lastly, the Monterey Pop Festival was in 1967. It's at least as important as Woodstock, I think.I'd say it was much more significant, to be honest. That's where Hendrix and Joplin became stars in the U.S., for instance. Jann Wenner refers to Monterey as "the nexus". Clive Davis called it the "creative turning point" of his life.

[leonaozaki]

I'd say it was much more significant, to be honest. That's where Hendrix and Joplin became stars in the U.S., for instance. Jann Wenner refers to Monterey as "the nexus". Clive Davis called it the "creative turning point" of his life.

Yeah, that's exactly what I was thinking. From what I have read Otis Redding crossed over to a white audience there as well. It was also significant in that it crystallized the idea that record companies could market the "counterculture" and "rock" and use them as brands.

rob

[Ilash]

Man, could you imagine being a teenager in America in 1967 at the Monterey Pop festival and seeing the Who, Otis Redding, Janis Joplin and Jimi Hendrix for the first time! It's easy to take these guys for granted now but it really must have been something being around when their music first took the world by storm.

[mattx110]

Man, could you imagine being a teenager in America in 1967 at the Monterey Pop festival and seeing the Who, Otis Redding, Janis Joplin and Jimi Hendrix for the first time! It's easy to take these guys for granted now but it really must have been something being around when their music first took the world by storm.
I imagine it'd be like going to the first Merlefest.


Just another completely amazing event I was either not born for, or too young to have realized it at the time.

[Brad Barton]

Man, could you imagine being a teenager in America in 1967 at the Monterey Pop festival and seeing the Who, Otis Redding, Janis Joplin and Jimi Hendrix for the first time! It's easy to take these guys for granted now but it really must have been something being around when their music first took the world by storm.Yup. I would kill to have been able to be at the Beatles' Shea stadium gig in '65. I'm sure the sound was atrocious, but being at the first ever stadium gig would've been exceedingly cool.

[Ilash]

I imagine it'd be like going to the first Merlefest.


Just another completely amazing event I was either not born for, or too young to have realized it at the time.

Ummmm, pardon my ignorance but what's Merlefest?

[Buried Alien]

The demise of several major 1960s acts in 1970 also had the reciprocal effect of launching the solo careers of several members of influential 1960s groups. For example, the Beatles' breakup spawned the solo careers of John Lennon, Paul McCartney, George Harrison, and Ringo Starr. The Supremes' breakup gave us Diana Ross's solo career, which was red hot in the 1970s and hardly missed a beat from her Supremes career. Simon & Garfunkel's split-up gave us Paul Simon and Art Garfunkel's solo careers.

One pop music scholar pointed out that in 1970, the Beatles, Elvis, the Supremes, and Simon and Garfunkel all had their last # 1 hits within weeks of each other, and in the same year, the charts were suddenly filled by such "new" names as the Jackson Five, the Osmonds, the Bee Gees, and other acts that would be more associated with the 1970s than the 1960s.

Other acts that debuted in 1970: Elton John, Billy Joel, Black Sabbath...1970s rock luminaries all.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[mattx110]

Ummmm, pardon my ignorance but what's Merlefest?
It's a sort of country, bluegrass, some blues, and everything tangentially related festival named for Doc Watson's son (named after Merle Travis), who died in a tractor accident.

Doc and an amazing large group of musicians put on a show in a bunch of stages. http://www.merlefest.org/MerleFestCMS/content.aspx?id=56&ekmensel=c580fa7b_8_30_56_1 This is the lineup for this year. Might not seem like it'd be up your alley, but you never know. Being completely immersed in something can make you like it a whole lot.

[howyadoin]

Art Garfunkel's solo careerHeh. Is that really something you can point to as an achievement or a milestone?

[Buried Alien]

Heh. Is that really something you can point to as an achievement or a milestone?

It hasn't been the greatest, but it's had its occasional highlights. I liked his remake of Sam Cooke's "Wonderful World" with his old buddy Paul Simon and James Taylor on choral support.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[leonaozaki]

Other acts that debuted in 1970: Elton John, Billy Joel, Black Sabbath...1970s rock luminaries all.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

Billy Joel's first record, Cold Spring Harbor, came out in 1971. His first big album, Piano Man was released in 1973.

Elton John's first record, Empty Sky, came out in 1969.

rob

[mlcm]

It's a shame that "Empty Sky" is so mediocre. But it's terrible in comparison with the next album, "Elton John".

[leonaozaki]

1994

Cramps, Flamejob
The Cranberries, No Need to Argue
Beck, Mellow Gold
Pavement, Crooked Rain, Crooked Rain
Soundgarden, Superunknown
Meat Puppets, Too High to Die
Husker Du, The Living End
Beastie Boys, Ill Communication
Nas, Illmatic
Hole, Live Through This
Sonic Youth, Experimental Jet Set, Trash and No Star
The Rolling Stones, Voodoo Lounge
Sugar, File Under: Easy Listening
Green Day, Dookie
R.E.M., Monster
Neil Young and Crazy Horse, Sleeps with Angels
Liz Phair, Whip-Smart
Jeff Buckley, Grace
Dead Can Dance, Toward the Within
Lisa Germano, Happiness
Lisa Germano, Geek the Girl
Elvis Costello, Brutal Youth
American Music Club, San Francisco
Bad Religion, Stranger than Fiction
Dave Alvin, King of California
Nine Inch Nails, The Downward Spiral
Beat Farmers, Viking Lullabys
Jello Biafra & Mojo Nixon with the Toadliquors, Prairie Home Invasion
Blur, Parklife
Boo Radleys, Learning to Walk
Peter Case, Sings Like Hell
Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds, Let Love In
Vic Chestnutt, Drunk
G. Love and Special Sauce, S/T
Golden Palimonos, Pure
Guided By Voices, Bee Thousand
Ben Harper, Welcome to the Cruel World
Indigo Girls, Swamp Ophelia
Killing Joke, Pandemonium
King Crimson, Thrak
Love and Rockets, Hot Trip to Heaven
Nick Lowe, The Impossible Bird
Lush, Split
Sarah McLachlan, Fumbling Towards Ecstasy
Mighty Mighty Bosstones, Question the Answers
Napalm Death, Fear, Emptiness, Despair
Nirvana, MTV Unplugged
Notorious B.I.G., Ready to Die
Oasis, Definitely Maybe
Offspring, Smash
Pantera, Far Beyond Driven
Pearl Jam, Vitalogy
Rollins Band, Weight
Mark Lanegan, Whiskey for the Holy Ghost
Selecter, The Happy Album
Southern Culture on the Skids, Ditch Diggin’

[elheffe]

1994
Nice list. 1994 was a good year, especially GBV's Bee Thousand. But the Whigs' Gentlemen came out in '93.

[leonaozaki]

Drat. Hoist on my own petard!

rob

[howyadoin]

1994

Husker Du, The Living EndThe Huskers were still together in 94? I thought they broke up after Warehouse.

[JeffreyWKramer]

I tend to go with either '67 or '77 myself, for reasons others have already adequately explained.