A Lark Ascending Posted February 28, 2012 Report Share Posted February 28, 2012 (edited) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-17170897 The ultimate sell out or are they still taking the piss? Had to smile at this: "To be given the opportunity to re-evaluate the Sex Pistols catalogue is every music lover's dream," said Universal's Karen Simmonds. Edited February 28, 2012 by A Lark Ascending Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shawn Posted February 28, 2012 Report Share Posted February 28, 2012 Yawn. The Sex Pistols in the 70s, Nirvana in the 90s...stuff that might have seemed "revolutionary" at the time, now just feels like a stunt and not a very good musical one at that. In the grand scheme of things, I don't think the Sex Pistols inspired any kind of lasting musical inspiration. plus The Ramones were always superior. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rdavenport Posted February 28, 2012 Report Share Posted February 28, 2012 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-17170897 The ultimate sell out or are they still taking the piss? Had to smile at this: "To be given the opportunity to re-evaluate the Sex Pistols catalogue is every music lover's dream," said Universal's Karen Simmonds. IMO, this just isn't right. Why would you want to listen to four men in their 50s rehash youthful nonsense? I was too young for punk rock. By the time I knew what it was, it was long dead (think Kenny Everett doing Sid Snot). In Manchester student / indie nightclubs of the 80s/90s, one would see small groups of ageing punks, clad in leather jackets with Cramps or Dead Kennedys patches, with the mohicans, their cider and their glue. They seemed hopelessly old and anachronistic then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clifford_thornton Posted February 28, 2012 Report Share Posted February 28, 2012 Yawn. The Sex Pistols in the 70s, Nirvana in the 90s...stuff that might have seemed "revolutionary" at the time, now just feels like a stunt and not a very good musical one at that. In the grand scheme of things, I don't think the Sex Pistols inspired any kind of lasting musical inspiration. plus The Ramones were always superior. I don't think of Nirvana as a stunt, just a band. Always preferred Mudhoney. Whatever the Pistols were, PiL was/is a hundred times better (at least). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSngry Posted February 28, 2012 Report Share Posted February 28, 2012 I've still got 45s of Anarchy In The UK and God Save The Queen, still play them every few years, and still get an adrenaline rush. OTOH, I quite enthusiastically bought Never Mind The Bollocks... upon release, and had sold it within six months. Sometimes moments are all that is needed. No need to apologize for moments, not if they're good ones. But... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shawn Posted February 28, 2012 Report Share Posted February 28, 2012 I don't think of Nirvana as a stunt, just a band. Always preferred Mudhoney. I don't really blame Nirvana themselves, more the record industry for "deciding" there was a style of music called "Grunge" (which never existed, it's fashion, not music) that was somehow superior to everything else at the time. I actually like Nirvana's "Bleach" album, but never warmed up to their later recordings. I started listening to Soundgarden in 1988 when Ultramega OK was released, they were more my cup of tea at the time and were ahead of the curve in the Seattle scene. I always enjoyed their new/retro approach of putting an alternative spin on the basic Sabbath building blocks...even going so far as re-recording Into The Void with new lyrics. In that era of the early 90s, the bands I really liked were the So-Cal groups like KYUSS and Sleep, the whole stoner/desert rock thing, cause it grooved like mad and had more of a psychedelic vibe to it. Plus it was just "fun" and had no delusions of importance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AfricaBrass Posted February 29, 2012 Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 (edited) I don't think of Nirvana as a stunt, just a band. Always preferred Mudhoney. I don't really blame Nirvana themselves, more the record industry for "deciding" there was a style of music called "Grunge" (which never existed, it's fashion, not music) that was somehow superior to everything else at the time. I actually like Nirvana's "Bleach" album, but never warmed up to their later recordings. I started listening to Soundgarden in 1988 when Ultramega OK was released, they were more my cup of tea at the time and were ahead of the curve in the Seattle scene. I always enjoyed their new/retro approach of putting an alternative spin on the basic Sabbath building blocks...even going so far as re-recording Into The Void with new lyrics. In that era of the early 90s, the bands I really liked were the So-Cal groups like KYUSS and Sleep, the whole stoner/desert rock thing, cause it grooved like mad and had more of a psychedelic vibe to it. Plus it was just "fun" and had no delusions of importance. Kyuss and Sleep were great! I still listen to their cds. I got into the Sub Pop scene in 1989 and used to go see all the bands. I loved Nirvana's Bleach and the Blew EP. I loved going to see the Melvins, Mudhoney, Tad, Nirvana and lot of other great bands. We were having a great time. I don't remember any delusions of importance back then with these guys, but I never saw Nirvana again after they made it. It's so funny, we used to think Pearl Jam was a corporate sellout band. I had spent the 80's playing shows in LA with my band and being frustrated at the success of the "Hair Farmers" as we called them. No one wanted to hear music influenced by Pink Floyd, the Velvet Underground, Can, Loop, Spacemen 3 and the Beatles. I was glad to see the whole Grunge movement rise up. P.S. Mudhoney were fantastic! I still listen to them and even dig their new recordings. Edited February 29, 2012 by AfricaBrass Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AfricaBrass Posted February 29, 2012 Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 (edited) One interesting thing is that around the same time Nirvana hit it big, I completely threw myself into jazz (this had nothing to do with Nirvana, of course). I still listened to other music, but jazz started becoming a bigger and bigger part of my life. By 1994, I'd say 95% of my music purchases were jazz. Oh yeah, back to the topic... The Sex Pistols haven't been relevent to me since I was a teenagers (and I did enjoy some of the PIL stuff too). "Anarchy in the Retirement Home" for the win! lol Edited February 29, 2012 by AfricaBrass Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JETman Posted February 29, 2012 Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 My jump to jazz had EVERYTHING to do with Nirvana and their ilk. Rock was dead for me at that time. Nothing innovative was happening. The only good thing about Cobain in my eyes was that he mentioned "Red" as a big influence. Even if he couldn't play guitar, at least he had the good sense to listen to someone who could. And Shawn, don't get me started on the Ramones. They come from the borough where I grew up in NYC. I saw them several times at places like CBGB's and the like. Fuck three chords. It would be a huge stretch to say that they could play two. They were complete hacks in EVERY sense of the word. They were lucky to hit when they did, when everyone was feeling all disenfranchised and shit! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidewinder Posted February 29, 2012 Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 Mr Rotten should stick to the TV adverts for country butter.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shawn Posted February 29, 2012 Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 I don't listen to The Ramones for musical ability, I like the catchy songs and the attitude. I stuck with the rock scene until 1995, then I moved almost exclusively to jazz for the next 8 or 9 years, now the pendulum has swung back to rock again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cih Posted February 29, 2012 Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 (edited) The re-runs on TV of 'Top of The Pops' from the period immediately prior to punk put me in no doubt about the importance of the Pistols. I was into punk as a kid (long after it was 'dead') and still love things like Alternative TV, early Buzzcocks etc. But ageing punks, mods, skinheads etc I just don't get Edited February 29, 2012 by cih Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John L Posted February 29, 2012 Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 A lot of punk was fake. The Sex Pistols were real. They didn't just played the punk rock. They walked the punk walk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllenLowe Posted February 29, 2012 Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 I like the Sex Pistols; check out the film about them, somewhere. A real ensemble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rdavenport Posted February 29, 2012 Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 The re-runs on TV of 'Top of The Pops' from the period immediately prior to punk put me in no doubt about the importance of the Pistols. I was into punk as a kid (long after it was 'dead') and still love things like Alternative TV, early Buzzcocks etc. But ageing punks, mods, skinheads etc I just don't get Two words - Paul Weller. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Lark Ascending Posted February 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 I hated them and everything they stood for at the time. They destroyed my musical universe! But I've rather enjoyed the main singles in recent years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shawn Posted February 29, 2012 Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 I hated them and everything they stood for at the time. They destroyed my musical universe! Which also described my experience with Nirvana and Pearl Jam in the early 90s . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSngry Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 I hated them and everything they stood for at the time. They destroyed my musical universe! You sound like Jazz talking about The Beatles! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shawn Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 I hated them and everything they stood for at the time. They destroyed my musical universe! You sound like Jazz talking about The Beatles! It seems to happen every 10-15 years or so, a big purge to level the playing field. Sometimes that ends up not being a good thing, but it's usually necessary to thin the herd a little and allow new groups/styles to develop. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quincy Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 I loved the Sex Pistols, actually no past tense about it. I had the good luck of traveling to the UK when they were beginning and again at the end, and they along with The Jam were the highlights of cultural musical exchanges with cousins that stuck with me for life. I ended up trading for live tapes & demos in the early '80s and along the way have added a few on CDR over the past decade. Oh, and I have Dallas & SF '78 on VHS. So yeah, I'm a fan, although as their life was so short it's not like I wade in their music for long stretches. This won't be available in the US though international shopping is so easy nowadays. I stuck w/ LPs of Bollocks and Swindle and another junk release and have a manic spin of some of that about once a year, or I dip into one of the live shows. I'm not really sure what this deluxe can have on it that hasn't already been released, though if they do a good job a "rounding up" I might be tempted. Maybe...I kind of doubt it though. I just want to make sure it isn't brickwalled. There used to be some very good youtube videos of Cook demonstrating his guitar licks. They were promos for instructional DVDs he was selling and my old "Favorites" links no longer work. But he was both very funny in them and his playing was rippin'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CraigP Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 Whatever the Pistols were, PiL was/is a hundred times better (at least). This. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quincy Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 Whatever the Pistols were, PiL was/is a hundred times better (at least). This. Not when they played Tokyo. I like both, but I don't buy into the above math. PiL did have cooler packaging though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Lark Ascending Posted March 1, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 I hated them and everything they stood for at the time. They destroyed my musical universe! You sound like Jazz talking about The Beatles! Indeed. But I was so much older then... Actually, I owe them a pint. Forced me to listen more widely beyond rock much more quickly than I might otherwise have done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.