Blues Rock: �Please, No More of That�

[MathOfInsects]

Hip-hop owes some aspects of the practice to Kool Herc's time in the Jamaican sound-system world, but the thing we call "hip-hop" was entirely a product of that particular convergence of events at 1520 Segwick Ave in the Bronx, in 1973. Nothing exists in isolation, of course, and many factors are in the mix, but Jamaican toasting is only a small one. (Coke La Rock, who was on the mic at Sedgwick, was not Jamaican.)

 

I should clarify, since there seems to be some confusion. I'm not saying New York is the ONLY city on the planet that has scenes. Just that it is notably scene-based. So hearing a product of the late-1990's-early-2000's indie-punk scene say they don't look to blues-rock for their inspiration, comes as no surprise at all. That scene had no interest in the boomer traditions of the past. Everyone making music in NY is in one form or another invested in "advancing the form." Your comment about Miles Davis is right in line with this: While the rest of the world was out there Lindy-hopping, a couple of relatively out-of-work musicians were woodshedding what then became bebop, and never looked back at the moldy-fig sounds again. Minton's was specifically a 'scene.'

 

Here is a Brit discussing the NY scene(s) of the mid-1970s. There is a book about this as well, and even though I enjoyed it, I can't for the life of me remember the title or author, or find it online right now:

 

New York music scene(s) in the mid-70's

 

 

EDIT: Found it!

Love Goes to Buildings on Fire

[KuruPrionz]

I read the article, a nice retrospective but we have to remember the author is providing content for New York Week so what's he gonna say? Pretty much what he did, and way off in hick town Fresno CA, I was digging the New Wave scene (Blondie and Talking Heads were hardly "punk").

 

I've not disputed that New York is one of the world's great cities, nobody in their right mind would say that. I don't really have a favorite per se and am more interested in the end with great songwriting - which seems to come from everywhere. Large metropolitan areas where it is possible to make connections are going to be magnet cities for aspiring talent, that has always been true. New York stands out in that regard, as does Los Angeles. For all that, the great music artists who did NOT come from either place is a huge and impressive list.

 

FWIW, when I was 14 my brother started bringing home records that were anything but blues based rock - Miles-Monk-Mingus-Trane-Sun Ra, classical from all periods and genres, Tibetian Monks, Turkish Village Music, storytelling music from Kenya, music from India, Japan, China - anything he could find that was not on the radio was brought home and played on his fairly impressive (by Fresno teenager standards) stereo.

 

I soaked all that up like a sponge. Then came Yes, ELP, Jethro Tull and that phase and then New Wave hit just as I was starting to perform in clubs playing all-original music that covered a broad spectrum of genres.

Then my sister turned me on to Joni Mitchell and I followed her well into her Jaco P era.

I'm not trained in classical or jazz and I've never had a mental catalogue of favorites but everything is an influence.

 

So when I read this - 'Anything that"s been beaten to death, obviously trend dictates those things will be extinct, and you evolve from those things," Strokes frontman Julian Casablancas said.- and then I listen to some of the material produced by the band he fronts, all I can think is WTF?

 

I put headphones on this afternoon and checked out some more Strokes songs on YouTube. I think 8-10 songs should provide a pretty decent idea of what a band has done (and probably can do).

I get that having had a successful career in the music business as long as they've had (and my hat is off to them) that you do get stereotyped and are expected to sound like you always have but with new material.

Not always true for everybody but in general the public dictates with their dollars what "artistic content" you will provide if you want to stay at the top.

 

The Good: The guitarists have some nice dual counterpoint riffs. The bassist seems able to do more than is required of him. The band is tight.

The Bad: Simply put, the Strokes are 4 on the floor flatliners. They don't use interesting beat or tempo variations, they have more or less one dynamic, the drummer seems limited, the singer even more limited and the stories they are trying to tell don't come across as clever or interesting.

 

I haven't heard the new album, maybe they've turned the page and started playing with new sounds and open ears. Based on what I heard, I have no interest in finding out.

Just keeping it real, everybody gets to like what they like and I am happy for them.

 

This has been an interesting thread, thanks for posting!!!! Cheers, Kuru

[MathOfInsects]

I agree, it's been a very interesting exchange.

 

Am I right that you might still perceive my comments as implying some inherent greatness or superiority about the New York scenes? I was only expressing familiarity with the tendency there to want to feel like you're looking "forward" in some way, and not doing what others have done. Because of that, an indie-punk band in the late 1990's/early 2000's would very definitely look elsewhere for their ideas, other than the blues rock of the 60's and 70s.

 

Great music comes from everywhere. One of my favorite all-time songwriters comes from here in SD. I'm not even a huge Strokes fan. I'm actually not a huge fan of many of the bands from that same scene/era--they can feel too condescending to me. Just that taken in context, Casablancas's comments do not surprise me for a NY band of their era, at all, because of the very particular nature of the scenes in NY.

 

By the way, some of the bands in that article did end up being categorized as New Wave later on, but that CBGB scene was very definitely the incubator for the "scene" that became punk. There was really no separation between (say) Blondie and the Ramones and Television and Patti Smith and the Talking Heads; it was all a continuum of underground NY rock. There's a movie called "Burning Down the House" that does a nice job of covering this-- a fun afternoon diversion if you're ever inclined.

[ElmerJFudd]

I think a few posts here shed some light on perspective. We all have different experiences and beliefs based on what we see and hear, experience within our own worlds. The Strokes are a NY band, successful enough to still be doing it and in their world - a sound that gets away from roots rock, classic rock, is important. That doesn"t mean the core blues sounds that launched the genre aren"t relevant, or that they don"t feel and sound as good as they always have. But rock has a massive family tree and there"s room for everyone to give it their best shot.

[Baldwin Funster]

How about just having more BLUES? Muddy, junior wells, buddy guy. I can give up blues rock for that.

[Leroy C]

How about just having more BLUES? Muddy, junior wells, buddy guy. I can give up blues rock for that.

For sure.

 

It's also worth noting that a lot of blues rock isn't just the same old guitar wanking solos over a 12-bar blues pattern that might be what a lot of folks have in mind. Quite a bit of it has moved in interesting directions, including a lot of "roots rock" such as Samantha Fish (see especially Belle of the West). It's not just "duh-NUH na-NUH!" anymore ...