Heh it’s possible 
1 Like
Beatles. Most succesful Little Richard cover band ever. Swines.
Budgie were better anyway
2 Likes
What is white music anyway? Fucking Greensleeves? 
One could argue I guess that electronic music is really shared by everyone, since while it was “invented” by white european folks it spread to all cultures so fast that no one can claim true ownership.
1 Like
I also think that Beatles, Rolling Stones etc. were the gentrification of blues music and infinitely more boring than the original blues, be it from the Delta or Hill Country or Chicago. Even the Sex Pistols were a stiff blues rock band and musically completely forgettable. Post punk & later hardcore (Discharge!) was the true punk music that kind of blew the lid off the boring rip off white rock music was before it.
5 Likes
When I first heard little Richard (I think it was the chopper scene in predator what I was about 7 or 8) it blew my mind. The amount of feeling and energy and straight up power in every performance he ever did. Absolutely legendary, and completely unparalleled.
3 Likes
I agree with all of this.
I can’t contribute much here but I remember reading an article a few years ago that described how LCD Soundsystem was the Huey Lewis and the News of our generation. I didn’t disagree.
3 Likes
Lucille will always be one of my favourite songs. Similar story, first time I ever heard Little Richard I was down for life. Total legend, made some monumental records.
1 Like
I think there was more to the Beatles than just blues, or really the blues and country inspired rock-n-roll, especially later. But it definitely was foundational. But there is no question that their sociopolitical privilege - and Elvis’ before them - allowed them to access a market for whom their presentation of that music was more palatable.
Post - punk > punk 100°%
1 Like
Strawberry fields sounds like little Richard to you?
Sure, they were really forward thinking in the studio. Their music however, while technically proficient was just gentrified blues rock, even if they could hide it pretty well sometimes. I do like some of their songs, or their riffs, but in the end I have no interest in listening to them ever. Same goes for all of their peers. Black Sabbath rules though!
I think his point is that they started out a little Richard covers band.
The fact they ended up a Stockhausen/Ravi Shankar covers band is a different matter.
4 Likes
I don’t agree with that. There was more to it.
But I mean if were talking about blues derivatives though: Sabbath was watered down Led Zeppelin who was loud blues.
Not too many people in the electronic music world possess the poetic sensibility of Laurie Anderson, so she gets my vote for being the Dylan of electronic music.
4 Likes
2 Likes
I thought you’d like that.
1 Like
Eh, first Sabbath album is a bit boring, but then they went their own way & focused on the riff like no one else before them or after, really. But yeah it’s all very much blues based, sure.
This.
@Unifono, check out Wimple Winch. Another English mid to late 60s Pop band, but they actually were psychadelic…
I’d say this is a massive oversimplification. They had many, many different influences in the later stuff - I hear plenty of Tin Pan Alley, for one. It’s fair enough that they’re not for you, tho.
1 Like
Watered down?
How dare you.
How very dare you.
4 Likes