Think ScottyEm's view is much nearer the point - esp after reading/watching histories of the genre...tho Rob, you want to align it more with the post-punk thing because the post-punk thing has more credibilty and more coolness...and if you've lived though the late 1970 and 1980s i guess that you will only equate disco with ultra-commercial c**p and think that things like Steve Dahl's Disco Demolition Derby Night (July 12, 1979, Comiskey Park Chicago at the baseball game between the Chicago White Sox and the Detroit Tigers) can only be a good thing....when there is so much more and so many innovators lost under all the mass-market stuff that was probs got a guest slot on the black & white minstral show (some how i guess 'All You Need Is Love' won't have a disco episode coming up...)

 

nah..its not about post punk 'coolness', half of my music life was pre-punk anyway.

 

i hated disco, because it wasnt a style that ever appealed to me, although i do have some disco in my collection, chic, sylvester, for eg... whilst i accept that disco was an american thing , and accept that it got a largeish gay following, i dont think 'house' derived from disco directly.

 

tony hadley and phil oakey in the early 80's were claiming 'we play funk' (hadley) and 'dance music' (oakey). ok, the funk and jazz funk of the late 70's early 80's played a big part in the uk pop scene with many pop singles becoming 'danceable'. plus the two tone scene actually got 'working class' lads off their arses and dancing... so i think there was a general swing towards dance throughout the 80's, culminating in the acid house scene.

think he might have a point there....maybe music decades dont run like 1960 - 1969, maybe they are better to be looked at like 67 - 77 or 87 - 97 maybe music vibes are out of sync with the western callender

 

(btw is 'grebo for eg' a charity record where PWEI end up singing Duffy :lol: )

 

erm... of course i have a point! :lol: music didnt change with a date... glam didnt reprisent the 70's any more then punk did.. early 60's was totally different from late 60's which had more in common with the early 70's.

 

 

nah..its not about post punk 'coolness', half of my music life was pre-punk anyway.

 

i hated disco, because it wasnt a style that ever appealed to me, although i do have some disco in my collection, chic, sylvester, for eg... whilst i accept that disco was an american thing , and accept that it got a largeish gay following, i dont think 'house' derived from disco directly.

You can always rely on tigerboy for a great, comprehensive read!

 

Great tracks there. I've seen that footage of Darryl Pandy before, very charismatic, very camp! Also love Frankie Knuckles 'Tears' - a TRUE pioneer in the foundations of house music AND an openly gay man aswell (have never overly liked Joe Smooths 'Promised Land' unfortunately...).

 

is that because of Paul Weller :lol: :lol: :cry: (are you geting bad thoughts of a new disco-dadrock genre)

 

http://i29.tinypic.com/f23sqx.jpg

tho obv being a black man who is a gay man and who is assocated with a genre thats part of club culture..now that says disco to me.... :lol:

 

however dont think any genre can be said to be derived from another directly...as it would just be a sub-section of the original genre or just the same thing (whatever new technology came out)...tho with house and disco you cant say they are totally separate enterties its obv that there is that link esp. when looking at earlier examples of the genre when its obv it was more of a black music thing...and disco is a bit of a bast*rd genre anyway having its roots in stuff like soul, funk and latin music (whatever happening inner city places like NYC)...and house will have picked up influences from electro and other electronic acts and other sub-genres of disco - like cosmic/space disco etc etc

 

Cerrone - Supernature (think goldfrapp, Róisín Murphy and Billie Ray Martin might have heard this record at least once)

 

Billie Ray Martin - Talking With myself (Frankie Knuckles Mix)

 

S'Express/Billie Ray Martin/Eric Robinson - Hey Music Lover

 

and i suppose you could be here all day trying to analyse the video of acid disco tune - hey music lover..esp it being a cover of a psychadelic soul record by sly & the family stone record as well...

 

Sly & The Family Stone - Dance To The Music - Hey Music Lover

 

 

nah..its not about post punk 'coolness', half of my music life was pre-punk anyway.

 

well if not post-punk, i guess punk will have been important to you - if youre 50 now...and if punk hit like more than 30 years ago - that must mean that you were about 18 - 20 when punk hit and that must be an important factor if disco is not your thing and too 'synthetic' for you....esp if punk was such a big musical explosion that the retro-hype says it was...it must have effected you and kinda moulded your thoughts esp when it comes to subjects such as 'manufactured' pop...tho i bet in 1967 you were probs loving things that were utter rubbish tho you couldve been part of the counter culture, could have spent your time listen to the Lovin' Spoonful but i guess you were just part of the audience for junior choice on the light programme!!! :lol:

 

 

This all depends if you are talking about chart fodder or about any music that's around. If the former then a decade is too long. I thought 90-93 was great for indie and grunge and 94-97 was Britpop. 97-99 was absolute pants and possibly the worst time for music ever. This continued until about 2002.

 

Even the 80s was the same 80-83 was great. 84-86 was $h!te but then it got better again towards the end of the decade as some really talented dance merchants started producing some fantastic acid and rave records.

tony hadley in the early 80's were claiming 'we play funk' ok, the funk and jazz funk of the late 70's early 80's played a big part in the uk pop scene with many pop singles becoming 'danceable'.

 

well now that you've brought up the subject of the 1980s pop and jazz-funk...well i think the competition is over...dont think you could get any worse...yeah think you have to give it to the 1980s the worst decade ever...mostly seems to be a cespit of over-produced nonsense and vomit inducing c**p...its the slight difference between the doobie brother's what a fool believes (which i am actually listing to now!!) and Micheal McDonald's Sweet Freedom (which was on the radio earlier and with seems to be made solely by the Yacht Rock-God of bellowing soft-rock-soul and a random bloke with a very cheap keyboard trying to stand in for 25 different musos)..production so bad that it was actually improved so much by the Danish Europop-bongo massive (Safri Duo).

 

Curtis Mayfield - Pusherman

 

Curtis Mayfield - Freddie's dead

 

Think there should be a few more votes for the 1980s here - cant have it trailing or equal to the 1970s esp when you had some thing so brilliant as the Curtis Mayfield :cheer: tracks above being made...much better than any 80s soul (tho jam & lewis were alright) or any blue-eyed soul pop band (tho i suppose the blow monkeys are probs one of the better examples than soem other random one that might have ended up on the miami vice soundtrack - but you get the idea...)

 

Blow Monkeys - This Is Your Life '89

 

Blow Monkeys - This Is Your Life '88

 

Ordinary Boys - I Luv U (well it easily be by the blow monkeys :lol: )

 

Teena Marie - I Need Your Lovin'

 

Curiosity Killed The Cat - I Need Your Lovin'

 

...now caN u spot the difference between them and below...or is it just the same idea :lol:

 

Jamiroquai - Canned Heat

 

Jamiroquai - Little L

 

 

every decade has its brilliant artists and great tunes even pre-1950s!!! (esp in jazz - tho it might have been called jas or jasz at the time :lol: - blues and country)...put when it comes to the bottom of the pop musical pile think the mainstream pop of the 1980s has to be much worse than the mainstream pop of 1970s (was listening to 100 hits 70s and there is a lot of cheese - but it can be tolerated) or the 1990s (at least i suppose you know what you are getting with Westlife and Boyzone :lol:)....a lot of 80s pop seems to have been made with a mentality of "oh look a new bit of technology - lets push a button and make a new noise!!!" (tho obv gonna leave that post-punk new pop thing as that actually be more equal to an indie thing like britpop)...three votes for the 1980s and 15 for the 2000s (i'm guessing the 1950s got a lot as it was such a long time a go its as releavant as Hoagy Carmichael now...)..surely there is something wrong there? as far pop goes some of the best pop records ever have been produced in the 2000s - dont think you can just get away with covering any old disco or motown tune now (x factor and westlife excepted here) which seemed to be the cop-out for the 90s mainstream pop artists....any decade that has Girls Aloud's Biology being released cant be the worst...esp when compared to dire synthpop and wannabe soul boys in expensive suits....

 

and will somebody please tell the human league that they are not Morris Day and the Time...(now where has that slide-slow gone :lol:)

 

 

Phil Oakey & Giorgio Moroder - Goodbye Bad Times

 

I Feel Love - Donna Summer

 

but yeah as grebo69 said it does matter if you are talking about chart fodder or about any music that's being made...as i guess now its easier to listen to almost anything that has been recorded from like 1900 onwards (is 100 hits jazz on its way??) but on the other hand i guess radio has evolved from like the era of the 60s pirates to a point where the music doesnt really matter its just secondary to the personality of the celebrity and so thats why they can get away with playing chasing cars every day at the same...but thats because i guess its become so competetive that everything has become holomogized into one mass....and thats why every body is saying the 2000s are so bad...

"well if not post-punk, i guess punk will have been important to you - if youre 50 now...and if punk hit like more than 30 years ago - that must mean that you were about 18 - 20 when punk hit and that must be an important factor if disco is not your thing and too 'synthetic' for you....esp if punk was such a big musical explosion that the retro-hype says it was...it must have effected you and kinda moulded your thoughts esp when it comes to subjects such as 'manufactured' pop...tho i bet in 1967 you were probs loving things that were utter rubbish tho you couldve been part of the counter culture, could have spent your time listen to the Lovin' Spoonful but i guess you were just part of the audience for junior choice on the light programme!!! "

 

thats about it...

 

is that because of Paul Weller :lol: :lol: :cry: (are you geting bad thoughts of a new disco-dadrock genre)

 

Oooh that Style Council version was bloody awful. Being only 24, I don't remember it obviously, but my Dad has their best of and I listened to it our of curiousity. Wish I hasn't, but then I'm not sentimental about the original anyway.

 

Still, I wish I was 21 in 1989. That would make 40 now, which seems like a small price to pay to experience such an amazing era.

 

Still, I wish I was 21 in 1989. That would make 40 now, which seems like a small price to pay to experience such an amazing era.

 

so di i , then youd understand why s/a/w stuff wasnt liked :)

I tend to think music has been in decline since the overuse of the sampler in 1987,

it was good for a moment, then it got boring, the only peaks musically was when "actual instruments" were played within bands.

 

yeah the 2000's were bland due to the plasticness of manufactured popstars, who are past their sell by date one year after their contract is signed, and the odd star does slip the net and makes it bigger,

 

some music dates very fast (ie current dance music), others mellow, some fade to become good again when it's deemed fashionable

 

but one thing that ocasionally does shine through is real music that is performed without the need of technically re-recorded sound, and thats the stuff that will be remembered by the listeners of the future.

 

in the 2010's, i really hope that real music makes a return, and shakes it all up again, but what we really need is big influx of British acts, and send them all worldwide in the same way that the US overloads us.

 

British invasions tend to kick in when there is a "2" in the year 1952, 1962, 1972, 1982, 1992, 2002

so 2012 sounds promising.

 

most new waves begin around the third quarter of each decade, Rock and roll, Flower power, Punk, Rap, Britpop and this time it seems to be a 70's/80's fusion.

 

see 1982 and 1962 for some tips. bye for now!

British invasions tend to kick in when there is a "2" in the year 1952, 1962, 1972, 1982, 1992, 2002

so 2012 sounds promising.

 

i dont agree with that m8... 62? ok the beatles got going but the invasion of the us charts was in 64-5-6. 72? what invasion? 82? ...but punk kicked off right in between 72 and 82! what happened in 92? 02?

 

most new waves begin around the third quarter of each decade, Rock and roll, Flower power, Punk, Rap, Britpop and this time it seems to be a 70's/80's fusion.

 

but the first 'new wave' was the beat boom and that took off in 63-4, britpop was 94-5, i think you are looking too hard for patterns that dont actually exist. besides this is 08, and nothing is happening.

 

tbh i dont think there CAN be a new revolution in music, unless something real outlandish becomes popular, as all the main styles have already been done... BY US! :lol:

 

'revivals' have been going on ever since the early 70's when roy wood spearheaded the glammed up 50's rock n roll revival.

 

later in the 70's punk and especially new wave revived the sounds/styles of the 60's, as did britpop and even todays 'indie' (which supposes to revive 80's indie which in turn was 60's derived).

Oooh that Style Council version was bloody awful. Being only 24, I don't remember it obviously, but my Dad has their best of and I listened to it our of curiousity.

 

Is he a big Paul Weller fan? Has he got the box set with about 70 singles on? i got the normal best of cheap a few months back in a 2nd hand shop raid :lol: - he's done a few singles that are good slices of motown-esque pop but on the other hand he has release some utter rubbidh and some of the most boring examples of dadrock (last single one of the worst this year but thankfully thats off the newbie!!!). but because was in the jam to some dudes who grew up in the 70s/80s Paul Weller is like some pious enterty that can be never criticized tho obv over 70 singles there's no quality control (blasphemy) and some nasty jazz-funk bollocks...tho when it comes to a boxset best of i think the John Martyn box set might be a better purchase....

 

so di i , then youd understand why s/a/w stuff wasnt liked :)

 

the only thing is if the s/a/w stuff wasn't liked...how did they have so many hits and sell so many records??? maybe this comment was truncated with the actual comment reading "so do i , then you'd understand why s/a/w stuff wasnt liked :) but those sorts of male music fans who will probably be similar to the types complaining about the success and popularity of Liam Fray, the kooks and the kaiser chiefs without realizing that Love Will Tear Us Apart is just one step away from being an OMD record!!! :lol: "

 

http://www.hypnotherapyinfo.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/kerrykatonahypnosis.jpg

...look it's the female Ian Curtis :lol: :lol:

 

Also on teletext there has been discussions about S/A/W, popular indie types and attacking the current #1 - you could probs view all these as separate arguemnts abotu the music but underneath an obsevation could be made about certian types not wanting to align themselves with the mainstream for egotastical reasons....

 

"House music doesn't need defending, but how bad are Stock, Aitken & Waterman in reality? Their hits have respectable levels of melodic/harmonic interest and are more creative than the average generic house song (less so than the peaks of the genre). If we need a byword for rubbish, how about One Republic? Jonno Teletext"

 

"I'm bored of the hatred towards Kaiser Chiefs and The Kooks. Most people don't like them because of their popularity among people who buy their music from Tesco. Before slating them, try to come up with a song that gets crowds dancing and singing along like Oh My God or She Moves In Her Own Way. Dead End Clown Teletext"

 

"I'm certainly not going to attack whatever's at No 1. Katy Perry's I Kissed A Girl is a great pop song, in the same way as Baby One More Time by Britney Spears or Kylie's Can't Get You Out Of My Head. There will always be a place in music for songs like that. Also, liking Radiohead doesn't automatically make you a snob, nor does liking Fratellis make you a boozy yob. Please, don't take it all so seriously. Indiegirl Teletext"

 

well i'm off to make a comment about the Ladyhawke album being given away free in the daily mail this week in the indie section...

the only thing is if the s/a/w stuff wasn't liked...how did they have so many hits and sell so many records???

 

but they DIDNT. singles sales were at an all time low in the late 80's , theres NO reprisentaion of any s/a/w track in 'the all time top sellers'. when new kids on the block hit the top spot in early 90, they did so with the lowest ever (at the time) selling track and 7 years earlier wouldnt have even made to top 40.

 

how they had so many hits, like westlife, is a total mystery as they ARE all the same record... must be goldfish fans..

but they DIDNT. singles sales were at an all time low in the late 80's , theres NO reprisentaion of any s/a/w track in 'the all time top sellers'. when new kids on the block hit the top spot in early 90, they did so with the lowest ever (at the time) selling track and 7 years earlier wouldnt have even made to top 40.

 

and a few years ago no doubt probably would have been #1 for 25 weeks selling the same amount....not really a good argument as havent singles (pre-download coming into the chart) been in terminal declined for like forever...and if a act like milli vanilli had been launched in the 1970s they too would have two top ten entries on the million sellers....

 

 

so new kids may have got to #1 with the lowest #1 sale (at the time) but since then god knows how many people have broken that record until you've got someone like orson and eric prydz....

 

and according to wiki New Kids was UK number one single January 7, 1990..so obv post Xmas singles slump when you can get to #1 with sod all....

 

 

and a few years ago no doubt probably would have been #1 for 25 weeks selling the same amount....not really a good argument as havent singles (pre-download coming into the chart) been in terminal declined for like forever...and if a act like milli vanilli had been launched in the 1970s they too would have two top ten entries on the million sellers....

 

 

so new kids may have got to #1 with the lowest #1 sale (at the time) but since then god knows how many people have broken that record until you've got someone like orson and eric prydz....

 

and according to wiki New Kids was UK number one single January 7, 1990..so obv post Xmas singles slump when you can get to #1 with sod all....

not the same argument though...in the late 80's singles were all still vynyl... todays singles are in differeng forms and lets face it... most get downloaded illegaly instead of buying.

 

singles sales were low in the late 80's onward because singles and chart fodder in general wasnt 'cool', the decent music was alternative, house, rap, indie, etc , 'cool' people bought albums, not singles.

singles sales were low in the late 80's onward because singles and chart fodder in general wasnt 'cool', the decent music was alternative, house, rap, indie, etc , 'cool' people bought albums, not singles.

 

In the late 80s, singles weren't cool. I dare say, quite the opposite perhaps? I would pressume house music and hip hop were arguably the coolest genres at the time, yet they predominantly only had the trusted 7" and 12" single formates as a means to sell on a mass? House music espeically. Records labels like FFRR, Rhythm King, Deconstruction and Champion were amongst the biggest labels in the UK for putting out "cool" house and hip-hop tracks in the late 80s.

Edited September 7, 200816 yr by ScottyEm

maybe there wasnt much of an british invasion but surely according to british music 1962/3 , 1972/3, 82/83

 

but there is a pattern for each decade around the seventh year for a sudden change

maybe there wasnt much of an british invasion but surely according to british music 1962/3 , 1972/3, 82/83

 

but there is a pattern for each decade around the seventh year for a sudden change

 

i think its totally random, punk boomed in 77, but nothing new boomed in 67, it was part of the natural evolution in music that had been going on since the beatles. 87?... saw?..lol.. 97?... nothing, 07? nothing. nah.... the only 7th year of a decade where there was a completely new sound blasting things away was 77.

not the same argument though...in the late 80's singles were all still vynyl... todays singles are in differeng forms and lets face it...

 

from discogs - formats that Depeche Mode's Personal Jesus single was released on in 1989...which you cannot disagree is not in the late 1980s....lots of different formats...lots of CD singles there as well...

 

Personal Jesus (12", Maxi) Mute Records Ltd. 1989

Personal Jesus (CD, Maxi) Sire Records Company 1989

Personal Jesus (7") Mute Records Ltd. 1989

Personal Jesus (12", Maxi, Ltd) Mute Records Ltd. 1989

Personal Jesus (CD, Mini) Mute Records Ltd. 1989

Personal Jesus (12") Sire Records Company 1989

Personal Jesus (7", Ltd) Mute Records Ltd. 1989

Personal Jesus (CD, Maxi) Intercord Tonträger GmbH, Mute Records Ltd. 1989

Personal Jesus (CD, Maxi, Ltd) Intercord Tonträger GmbH, Mute Records Ltd. 1989

Personal Jesus (CD, Maxi) Virgin France S.A. 1989

Personal Jesus (12", Promo) Sire Records Company 1989

Personal Jesus (CD, Maxi) Alfa Records, Inc 1989

Personal Jesus (12") Virgin France S.A. 1989

Personal Jesus (7") Indisc 1989

Personal Jesus (12") Intercord Tonträger GmbH 1989

Personal Jesus (12") Intercord Tonträger GmbH 1989

Personal Jesus (CD, Maxi) Indisc 1989

Personal Jesus (7") Virgin France S.A. 1989

Personal Jesus (12", Promo) Mute Records Ltd. 1989

Personal Jesus (7") Intercord Tonträger GmbH 1989

Personal Jesus (12") Sanni Records 1989

Personal Jesus (12") Mute Records Ltd. 1989

Personal Jesus (CD, Mini, Maxi) Mute Records Ltd. 1989

Personal Jesus (Cass, Single) Sire Records Company 1989

Personal Jesus (12", Maxi) Sire Records Company 1989

Personal Jesus (12", Maxi) Indisc 1989

Personal Jesus (12") Virgin France S.A. 1989

Personal Jesus (CD, Single)