thesexofit said:

We could go on and on LOL. Blues most likely has early links to country music so there you go.....

Blues had its origin from slavery days. In some cases it (and some spirituals) was communication code between slaves that the master couldn't understand. But during the early 1900's there was some crossbreeding between "blues" and "hillbilly". "Hillbilly" was the original name for "country and western". In many cases if a blues record became popular, the record companies would record it with a hillbilly performer (or vice versa). Some acts like Bob Wills and his Texas Playboys mixed country with jazz & ragtime. In a way country and bluegrass has some influence from Africa, since the banjo comes from there.

MickyDolenz said:

thesexofit said:

We could go on and on LOL. Blues most likely has early links to country music so there you go.....

Blues had its origin from slavery days. In some cases it (and some spirituals) was communication code between slaves that the master couldn't understand. But during the early 1900's there was some crossbreeding between "blues" and "hillbilly". "Hillbilly" was the original name for "country and western". In many cases if a blues record became popular, the record companies would record it with a hillbilly performer (or vice versa). Some acts like Bob Wills and his Texas Playboys mixed country with jazz & ragtime. In a way country and bluegrass has some influence from Africa, since the banjo comes from there.

I had no idea the banjo was an african instrument LOL. Thanks for the info. And yes by myself saying "early links" I meant "hillbilly" sorta stuff. Deep south stuff etc...

thesexofit said:

MickyDolenz said:

Blues had its origin from slavery days. In some cases it (and some spirituals) was communication code between slaves that the master couldn't understand. But during the early 1900's there was some crossbreeding between "blues" and "hillbilly". "Hillbilly" was the original name for "country and western". In many cases if a blues record became popular, the record companies would record it with a hillbilly performer (or vice versa). Some acts like Bob Wills and his Texas Playboys mixed country with jazz & ragtime. In a way country and bluegrass has some influence from Africa, since the banjo comes from there.

I had no idea the banjo was an african instrument LOL. Thanks for the info. And yes by myself saying "early links" I meant "hillbilly" sorta stuff. Deep south stuff etc...

And Scottish gospel, brought over with the mayflower ended up sharing chord structure with virtually all early American gospel. No great shakes when you think about it, but some elements of the US population shudder at the thought the black and white US being derived from the UK.

Joe's gonna be pissed with y'all. That's all.

thesexofit said:

MickyDolenz said:

Blues had its origin from slavery days. In some cases it (and some spirituals) was communication code between slaves that the master couldn't understand. But during the early 1900's there was some crossbreeding between "blues" and "hillbilly". "Hillbilly" was the original name for "country and western". In many cases if a blues record became popular, the record companies would record it with a hillbilly performer (or vice versa). Some acts like Bob Wills and his Texas Playboys mixed country with jazz & ragtime. In a way country and bluegrass has some influence from Africa, since the banjo comes from there.

I had no idea the banjo was an african instrument LOL. Thanks for the info. And yes by myself saying "early links" I meant "hillbilly" sorta stuff. Deep south stuff etc...

Yes, some southern blacks at the time were fans of "hillbilly" and "folk" music and some of the poor whites were fans of "blues" and "race" songs. So of course, each genre had some influence on the other. Henry Glover, an African American, produced and helped write many country records on King Records. There were black "blues" and "R&B" musicians who played on some of the "hillbilly" songs that were on the label (King) and white "hillbilly/country" musicians that played on some of the blues and gospel songs. This was long before the mixed race house bands of Stax & Motown.

There is a ton of great music from the UK, for sure! I just did a quick glance through my top 100 artists, and 34 of them hail from the UK!

SquirrelMeat said:

Harlepolis said:

All of those people drew their influences whether directly or indirectly from Black American artists who planted their mark ever so firmly on music.

So, its nothing but a rerun.

And black American music drew influence from Scottish and Welsh gospel. So its a re run of a re run.

Whats your point? Good music is good music. Influence is the biggest form of compliment.

It doesn't take away from the fact that the UK is a music powerhouse in creative terms. It was the pre cursor for Amercian black music, and, in the case of the list of artists starting this thread, it has produced all these world leading artitsts, despite only being the size of Florida.

Why are people getting bent outta shape over my comment? Did I say that influence was otherwise? Yeah good music is good music and I like some of the artists in that list, but on a larger scope, Black American artists did it better IMO, just the fact they influenced those artists to come up with their musical statements to begin with should testify for that, so my point is UK didn't do it better, sorry.

And gospel music was only an assimilated(actually, forced) version of the celebrations/gathering tradition that used to take place in Africa before slavery. The Christian form was only a modification from the new condition they were forced into. I'm in the Middle East right now and some of the African(Nigerian) weddings I go to look like they could've been Baptist church sermons if the theme was religious/Christian. That tells me that whatever traditions they had were older than the influences they drew from their colonizers.

[Edited 1/30/11 23:02pm]

Timmy84 said:

Harlepolis said:

All of those people drew their influences whether directly or indirectly from Black American artists who planted their mark ever so firmly on music.

So, its nothing but a rerun.

As of this point I don't give a fuck where it came from, it's all damn good. US, UK, who fucking cares anymore?

agree with both of you, I hear influences from black american artists too, but they are all wonderful artists with great music

and you did NOT forget Steve Winwood!

Harlepolis said:

All of those people drew their influences whether directly or indirectly from Black American artists who planted their mark ever so firmly on music.

So, its nothing but a rerun.

/end thread.

Harlepolis said:

SquirrelMeat said:

And black American music drew influence from Scottish and Welsh gospel. So its a re run of a re run.

Whats your point? Good music is good music. Influence is the biggest form of compliment.

It doesn't take away from the fact that the UK is a music powerhouse in creative terms. It was the pre cursor for Amercian black music, and, in the case of the list of artists starting this thread, it has produced all these world leading artitsts, despite only being the size of Florida.

Why are people getting bent outta shape over my comment? Did I say that influence was otherwise? Yeah good music is good music and I like some of the artists in that list, but on a larger scope, Black American artists did it better IMO, just the fact they influenced those artists to come up with their musical statements to begin with should testify for that, so my point is UK didn't do it better, sorry.

[Edited 1/30/11 23:02pm]

That makes zero sense. First does not automatically equate to better.

[Edited 1/31/11 6:31am]

Robbie Williams sucks ass.

JoeTyler said:

this is not a US vs UK thread

JoeTyler said:

THE UK DOES IT BETTER!

TyphoonTip said:

Harlepolis said:

Why are people getting bent outta shape over my comment? Did I say that influence was otherwise? Yeah good music is good music and I like some of the artists in that list, but on a larger scope, Black American artists did it better IMO, just the fact they influenced those artists to come up with their musical statements to begin with should testify for that, so my point is UK didn't do it better, sorry.

[Edited 1/30/11 23:02pm]

That makes zero sense. First does not automatically equate to better.

[Edited 1/31/11 6:31am]

Its all subjective and you're free to think whatever you want. But when the likes of John Lennon and Keith Richards admitted in so many ways than one that folks like Bo Diddley, Little Richard & Chuck Berry could kick their asses musically, I'll take their words over yours

[Edited 1/31/11 14:32pm]

Also to name but a few....

Frankie Goes To Hollywood

The Specials

Massive Attack

Sex Pistols

Gorillaz

Big Audio Dynamite

Adam Ant

UB40

Damn, even Madonna tried to be British

alphastreet said:

Timmy84 said:

As of this point I don't give a fuck where it came from, it's all damn good. US, UK, who fucking cares anymore?

agree with both of you, I hear influences from black american artists too, but they are all wonderful artists with great music

and you did NOT forget Steve Winwood!

GREAT ARTIST!

I tend to think the UK has better bands and the US has better solo artists

US:

Dylan

Hendrix

Prince

Chuck Berry

James Brown

Johnny Cash

Hank Williams

Woody Guthrie

Joni Mitchell

Miles Davis

Springsteen

Stevie

Marvin Gaye

Aretha

Michael Jackson

Elvis

Ray Charles

Sam Cooke

just to name a few off the top of my head

not to mention EVERY great blues artist who ever lived!! LOL

Ummm, excuse me. TEARS FOR FEARS.

JoeTyler said:

Phil Collins

you have to remove quite a few points from the UK side for that right there!

JoeTyler said:

Def Leppard

lol

I don't understand why you have a lol included with the Def listing. Pour Some Sugar On Me is a better song than anything that Coldplay ever even listened to, even better than most songs that they have plagerized written.

allsmutaside said:

JoeTyler said:

Def Leppard

lol

I don't understand why you have a lol included with the Def listing. Pour Some Sugar On Me is a better song than anything that Coldplay ever even listened to, even better than most songs that they have plagerized written.

NDRU said:

JoeTyler said:

Phil Collins

you have to remove quite a few points from the UK side for that right there!

The UK still hates Phil Collins!

allsmutaside said:

JoeTyler said:

Def Leppard

lol

I don't understand why you have a lol included with the Def listing. Pour Some Sugar On Me is a better song than anything that Coldplay ever even listened to, even better than most songs that they have plagerized written.

Def Leppard rules, least the original lineup including Steve Clark.

Harlepolis said:

TyphoonTip said:

That makes zero sense. First does not automatically equate to better.

[Edited 1/31/11 6:31am]

Its all subjective and you're free to think whatever you want. But when the likes of John Lennon and Keith Richards admitted in so many ways than one that folks like Bo Diddley, Little Richard & Chuck Berry could kick their asses musically, I'll take their words over yours

[Edited 1/31/11 14:32pm]

Of course it's subjective. If you just like something becausse you feel it more, then there is little to argue with. However, your reasoning that just 'because someone did something first', that makes them inherently better. ..........I say again, that makes zero sense.

Presumeably Diddley, Richard, & Berry were quite capable, and indeed had the inclination, of writing things akin to 'A Day In the Life', Strawberry Fields, Lucy in the Sky, etc..., but they just chose not to.

JoeTyler said:

At least since 1963! (including Ireland)

The Beatles

The Rolling Stones

The Kinks

The Who

Cream

Eric Clapton

Pink Floyd

Black Sabbath

Led Zeppelin

Deep Purple

Bad Company

David Bowie

T.Rex

Roxy Music

Bryan Ferry

Brian Eno

Yes

Genesis

Phil Collins

Peter Gabriel

Paul McCartney

John Lennon

George Harrison

Queen

AC/DC (scottish & british blood...)

The Police

Sting

Duran Duran

Eurythmics

Simple Minds

The Human League

Wham

U2

Depeche Mode

George Michael

Judas Priest

Iron Maiden

Ozzy Osbourne

Madchester Scene

The Stone Roses

LFO

Techno/Rave acts

Primal Scream

Suede

Blur

Jamiroquai

Oasis

Portishead

Robbie Williams

Radiohead

The Verve

The Prodigy

Basement Jaxx

Coldplay

Keane

Franz Ferdinand

Arctic Monkeys

Roisin Murphy

Amy Whinehouse

Duffy

just to name a few...

!!!!!!

discuss...

...Except Contemporary R&B and Hip-Hop. Yes, I know, there is the Sade album that come out once every 8-10 years.

Maybe it's the fault of British record companies for not strongly pushing more UK R&B to the American market. Growing in the 80s-early 90s, I could turn on the radio and hear acts like Soul ll Soul, Loose Ends, Mica Paris, Junior, Musical Youth, Billy Ocean, yes even 5 Star!

Now it seems British record companies are more interested in breaking the next British rock band (or chick who sings 60s Motown-style) in the States. Your list seems to reflect some of that.

Tom Jones

Simply Red

Ray Davis

David Bowie

Thin Lizzy

.........

Oh...Slash from Guns and Roses...

[Edited 1/31/11 18:52pm]

TyphoonTip said:

Harlepolis said:

Its all subjective and you're free to think whatever you want. But when the likes of John Lennon and Keith Richards admitted in so many ways than one that folks like Bo Diddley, Little Richard & Chuck Berry could kick their asses musically, I'll take their words over yours

[Edited 1/31/11 14:32pm]

Of course it's subjective. If you just like something becausse you feel it more, then there is little to argue with. However, your reasoning that just 'because someone did something first', that makes them inherently better. ..........I say again, that makes zero sense.

Not generally speaking, but in this case it does. When all of those UK acts mentioned tried to copy those artists(who spent their lives mastering their instruments/music, mind you) to no vail and like I said, admitted that those artists were better than them, what does that tell you? I think it makes abit of sense, you're just not that keen to give the credit.

And Diddly, Richard & Berry wrote songs that made their audience resonate and identify with them and it made their legacy endure to this day, thats good enough, don't worry about the rest. And don't think your condescending tone will make songs like "Strawberry Fields Forever"(although I love them) the end all/be all of song writing, you have to remember that people relate to music differently. What you might put on a pedestal, 10 others might feel indifferent to it. Just a thought.

Harlepolis said:

TyphoonTip said:

Of course it's subjective. If you just like something becausse you feel it more, then there is little to argue with. However, your reasoning that just 'because someone did something first', that makes them inherently better. ..........I say again, that makes zero sense.

Not generally speaking, but in this case it does. When all of those UK acts mentioned tried to copy those artists(who spent their lives mastering their instruments/music, mind you) to no vail and like I said, admitted that those artists were better than them, what does that tell you? I think it makes abit of sense, you're just not that keen to give the credit.

And Diddly, Richard & Berry wrote songs that made their audience resonate and identify with them and it made their legacy endure to this day, thats good enough, don't worry about the rest. And don't think your condescending tone will make songs like "Strawberry Fields Forever"(although I love them) the end all/be all of song writing, you have to remember that people relate to music differently. What you might put on a pedestal, 10 others might feel indifferent to it. Just a thought.

So the only way of giving them credit is to say that they were 'better'?!

OK, you have missed my point.

To be clear; I'm not arguing that one artist is 'better' than another. If someone hates the Beatles but loves John Lee Hooker or Lead Belly, then I respect that. You don't choose the music you love, it chooses you.

However! You said: "all of those UK acts mentioned tried to copy those artists...." And THAT'S what I'm taking exception to. If you can explain away John Lennon's music as nothing more than copies of what had gone before, then you really need to listen more closely.

There is no doubt that the artists you mentioned were hugely influential on Lennon's music particularly early in his career. But the reason for me mentioning songs like "A Day In The Life" & Strawberry Fields ect... is that Lennon took those influences and shaped them into something completely new. Something that Little Richard or Chuck Berry weren't capable of writing. And that's not insulting them. It simply means they were not John Lennon, and therefore not able to write the music that he wrote. Not necessarily 'better' music, but definitely not imitations of the artists you mentioned.

I'm happy to accept rational, well reasoned arguments, even if I happen not to agree with them. But unfortunately I can't see that in anything you've written.

[Edited 2/1/11 3:56am]

JoeTyler said:

"Rule Britania!
Britannia rule the waves.
Britons never, never, never shall be slaves."

[Edited 2/1/11 4:51am]

No they don't.