Head To Head
Log In
Register
Unsung Forum »
Very British
Log In to post a reply

Pages: 6 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Next ]
Topic View: Flat | Threaded
Dog 3000
Dog 3000
4611 posts

Re: Very British
Dec 11, 2007, 18:47
Not sure where you're coming from here -- The Who has been massively popular in the US ever since Tommy/Woodstock (even if they never really had the hit singles on the radio to go with the sold out arenas -- "I Can See For Miles" peaked at #9, and that was the only time they ever had a top 10 hit!) They're definitely part of the "big 4" of the American Classic Rock 70's (with Zep, Floyd and the Stones.)

Suspect maybe a bit of that British-feeling-slighted-by-hometown-bands thing Ian referred to below? (I can't imagine Townshend was disagreeable to doing huge profitable tours in North America!)

As for Quadrophenia -- well, that record is awfully specific to a subculture that simply doesn't exist over here (or at least didn't in the 1970's; I daresay most of what Americans know about "mod" comes directly from Quadrophenia and all those latter-day documentaries about The Who!)
Dog 3000
Dog 3000
4611 posts

Re: Very British
Dec 11, 2007, 18:51
T-Rex was a one hit wonder ("Bang A Gong" as it was titled over here.)

However they were also somewhat known at the time specifically for their failure to cross the pond; it's not like Bolan didn't TRY to become a star in America!

Seems like it was a case of too much hype poisoning the waters (if you tell people X is the next big thing, sometimes they go out of their way to ho-hum it. I think he may have been seen as simply a bubblegum version of the much hipper "glamour" of Bowie & Lou Reed, and therefore more hype than substance.)

Slade did even worse -- their only US hit was "Run Runaway" in the 80's!

"Cum On Feel The Noize" is a Quiet Riot song!
Dog 3000
Dog 3000
4611 posts

Edited Dec 11, 2007, 19:09
Re: Very British
Dec 11, 2007, 19:05
"Punk" was definitely a very different dynamic in the UK. There never was any such thing as "popular punk" over here until Rancid and that kind of thing in the 1990's (seems to me the Sex Pistols record finally went platinum around then too.)

American "punk" had it's origins in 60's garage rock, carried on by a few dead-enders in the mid-70's (Stooges, Rocket From The Tombs, Dictators), then turning into a "hipster scene" specifically in NYC in the later 70's (most of the Cleveland scene moved to NY.)

Somehow this vibe got picked up in the UK and there was a safety pin explosion! But Sex Pistols were a total dud in the US (zero radio play; more like a mass media punchline about "those crazy kids today" than any kind of musical impact -- see notorious punk rocker episodes of TV shows "WKRP" and "CHiPs") The Clash didn't score a hit until they stopped sounding punk ("Train In Vain").

Instead, America got "New Wave" -- the corporate blandification of punk by crossing it with disco-friendly beats and adding synthesizers (ultimate example: Blondie.) My sense is the New Wave in turn had relatively little impact in the UK (were The Cars ever big over there -- at least before the 80's/MTV era?)

And maybe that explains the Clash's "problem" -- they went "new wave" with Sandanista!
zphage
zphage
3378 posts

Re: Very British
Dec 11, 2007, 19:10
British subculture powered many musical movements, clothing, haircuts: mods, rockers, hard mods=skinheads, teds, boot boys(?), punks, skinpunks=skunks, two tone, new romantic, goth, rave, etc

It has definitely slowed down, become less dynamic.
IanB
IanB
6761 posts

Re: Very British
Dec 11, 2007, 19:11
The Who could be very smart on these issues as they would play Charlton Football Ground (twice) and Celtic FC and Swansea FC to huge crowds but also play a bunch of home town shows at Hammersmith Odeon and smaller regional shows more or less in the same year. So there was always something (if not much) for those fans beyond London right up to Who By Numbers. I can't remember them playing a single show in 77 and after that it wasn't really The Who any more.

I'm not sure any of the four of them ever opted for tax exile status even when it must have been ruinous not to.
Dog 3000
Dog 3000
4611 posts

Re: Very British
Dec 11, 2007, 19:24
Has there been any new subculture since the ravers & hiphoppers of the 90's?

Seems to me everything today is a retro/nostalgia move (The Strokes and Franz Fredinand look and sound like "1979", Oasis aiming for the magic of "1967", Wolfmother still believes in "1972" etc.)

Is there a distinctive "2007 look/sound" or isn't it just a mish-mosh of the all the looks and sounds of the late 20th century?

But hey, Zeppelin's back, so who knows what year this is anyway!
machineryelf
3679 posts

Edited Dec 11, 2007, 19:47
Re: Very British
Dec 11, 2007, 19:41
Before 74 the Who pushed the envelope as far as live performance went, they experimented, they stretched out, they improvised, they changed both live and on album. Post 74 although they retained some of that in the studio, in concert they became a greatest hits machine, still a formidable live force but lacking that cutting edge that they had.
Some of this was probably due to technical problems they had with the early tape machines they were using which i believed pissed off Daltrey no end, some of it was due to the fact they 3/4 of the Who needed to be on the road to make some dosh
IMHO the Who paved the way for all the aging rockers to make a comfortable living from banging out the hits and ignoring the new music.
All well and good to them, they deserve a few bob, but how much better could it have been if they had tried pushing a bit harder.

Quadrophenia is a superb album, let it speak for itself, Daltrey trying to explain little England to America is 1. A waste of time 2.Ruining a perfectly good flow of music 3. Pissing off Johnny Punter who wants him to shut the fuck up and get onto Magic Bus

edit-the point i'm trying to make is that American tours gave The Who a chance to play it safe, they could have taken advantage of this and ploughed back their[Townshend's] ideas into the live show, but they didn't , they took the safe greatest hits route.
Dog 3000
Dog 3000
4611 posts

Re: Very British
Dec 11, 2007, 20:00
More ramble on Quadrophenia --

I've never heard anything from the 73-74 tours, but I have heard a 1979 show when they were doing Quadrophenia all over again as a tie-in with the movie, and I thought it sounded pretty good (and no longwinded explanations from Daltrey either.)

I have read that the Quad tour didn't go over well the first time though -- not only does it make no particular sense to someone outside of the "mods vs rockers" camp, but it's much "softer" sounding than their previous records. The Who were beloved for their hard rock, not their high falootin' concepts. All the horns and keyboards and ocean sounds don't really make for a good stadium tour. (Though I guess they had some of these issues sorted out by the end of the decade.)

Anyway -- and I know there are Americans who love this album -- but I've always thought it was over-arranged and sort of mushy in the music department (whereas Tommy is severely under-arranged, but somehow that works better for me.)

I don't really think you need to know that much about scooters and pep pills and the hip hairdos of 1966 to vibe on the "feelings" of that record anyway (adolescent angst, frustrated sexual desire, hating your job, staring at the ocean, etc. -- all things American kids can relate to.)

In short -- maybe it was really the music, not the cultural barrier!

They didn't write any rockers of note after 1973 either, they did sort of become a greatest-hits show at that point.

But I guess I'm not sure how their popularity in America was responsible for the decline in musical ferocity -- if they'd been less popular in America, would that have made their music better? Wouldn't it have been more likely that they'd break up the band and move on to other things (not being able to earn much of a living based on playing local pubs and football fields in the UK?)

Seems like it boils down to a globalized version of the usual "core fans vs. mass fans" issue (you know, "I was into this band back when they were cool, but now there's all these dipshits listening to their music too, and so they're not cool anymore.")

With the added comment that sometimes popularity DOES make artists turn musically lame, when they start to believe their own hype (Eric Clapton, Michael Jackson, the list is endless.)
Dog 3000
Dog 3000
4611 posts

Edited Dec 11, 2007, 20:05
Re: Very British
Dec 11, 2007, 20:04
(See more Quadro ramble posted contemporaneosly below!)

You may be right about The Who being the first "important group" to deliberately turn themselves into an oldies act.

I'm sure boozing and drugging and getting older have a lot to do with the loss of fire in the belly as well. The party has to end sooner or later, one way or another.

It seems to me the only realistic alternative is to do it like the Beatles or Zeppelin -- just break up already (oops! Spoke too soon on that last one. Bring on the HITS!)
machineryelf
3679 posts

Re: Very British
Dec 11, 2007, 21:28
But I guess I'm not sure how their popularity in America was responsible for the decline in musical ferocity -- if they'd been less popular in America, would that have made their music better? Wouldn't it have been more likely that they'd break up the band and move on to other things (not being able to earn much of a living based on playing local pubs and football fields in the UK?)

As i see it American success and the huge bucks involved gave Daltrey, Moon & Entwistle the leverage to tell Townshend to quit with the arty stuff and get on with being a rock n roll band. Daltrey knew that Townshend needed him to beef up his ideas and that Townshend needed a successful Who to payroll his ideas, Moon hated Quadrophenia because it cramped his style, they all wanted the cash to drink, smoke , snort to levels they were accustomed too

On the other hand all 3 knew without Townshend they were fucked, hence no band break up, compromise reached, after 74 they were still a monumental live act, but a compromised one.

I don't think the music suffered, but i thinkthe live shows did.
The music went tits up when Townshend spread himself too thinly over various solo and Who albums. After Moon died it didn't really matter.
Pages: 6 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Next ] Add a reply to this topic

Unsung Forum Index