Casey, you fantasize about me for a reason. While Danzig is pretty much God, Michale Graves has better vocals.
Misfits Bad Religion Dropkick Murphys The Bouncing Souls goood shit. oh, and Comeback Kid is great hardcore.
Dead Kennedys Misfits Ramones The Clash Sex Pistols Dead Boys Black Flag Bad Religion Circle Jerks The Unseen Sum 41 Rise Against ...and many, many, many more. Now these bands are what I call great music.
Well, yeah. But the only problem I have with his comments is that he doesn't interprete. He just says stuff that doesn't make sense so he gets attention. The Ramones The Clash The Sex Pistols Rancid Social Distortion Rise Against The Casualties (some songs) ---- Green Day The Distillers Blink 182 Sum 41
how does it not make sense? that's what i said. pretty straight forward if you ask me. just because it's not your opinon and just because i said something not many people say doesn't mean that it doesn't make sense.
Then again, in a way...I kind of agree with st0f. Guarantee you the only reason you said those 3 bands aren't "punk" was simply because they were mainstream and everybody loved them. Hell, if it wasn't for those three bands getting the recongition, half of the bands on this list wouldn't get the shit they deserved. Yeah, I said it...bite me.
at the drive-in was pretty mainstream. gang of four was pretty mainstream. they sounded the same as each other, except for the clash really. that isn't punk. don't assume you know how i think.
I don't consider At The Drive-In punk, but I've had this argument too many times with too many people for me to care anymore.
Totally. There's always arguing about genres. But when you say the bands that started or just made a genre what it is, can't be consider to be part of that genre, you've lost it.
but i don't believe they started this genre. the first person to play rock music started the punk attitude and lifestyle. i believe bands like mc5, the stooges, and velvet underground kick started punk music. learn to look past 1977. to me punk is something that doesn't try to follow anything. if you start a band that uses three chords, a loud simple bass line and 4/4 time signatures, i wouldn't consider you a punk band because you're following what people told you was punk. but if you do your own thing, and just let it flow, then i'd consider you a punk band. which is why i consider at the drive-in or murder city devils punk. they were just there to play music and not care what the critics think. even though atdi ripped off of angel hair a few times.
I know, and if those bands started it, then that's fine...but starting it doesn't exactly mean that they revolutionized the genre for what it is. Christ, take a look at (hate to use this example) bands like Korn and Limp Bizkit and to a lesser known extent, LP. They revolutionized their genre, but they didn't start it, bands like Faith No More, and the Anthrax/P.E. cover, and the Aerosmith/Run DMC cover. They're the ones that showed them that that kind of music could be done. Same for punk music. So what? Me and st0f, and probably a couple other people on here agree that Ramones, Sex Pistols, and the Clash can be considered punk music, so do yourself a favor and go back listening to what you consider to be "punk" and stop trying to own us like we're from the fucking special group in school.
Amen to the first (VU = love), but I think 1977 was a pivotal year. Franny, I see your point but genre is so subjective now-a-days that it's useless to argue like this. I recommend reading Cultures in Popular Music.
If punk is just something that sounds different than something else, then I'm thinking the wiggles are pretty punk.
fine, that's good. what you think is different and what i think is different is all personal choice really. that's what punk is. being your own person and not letting people tell you what to believe or what to do or how to act.
I think the only one who can stop all this bickering is. . . Mitch Clem. Creator of Nothing Nice to Say. http://www.mitchclem.com/nothingnice/
Oh my god, I love you. Mitch Clem is pretty much my hero. But yeah, this argument is pretty pointless and it could probably go on forever. Here's what I think about the subject: To me, punk rock is doing and saying what you feel when you feel it. I mean, sure, there are certain bands that are a staple of the culture, but I think that the mainstream idea of punk rock is far too definite. It's not always about distortion and loud guitar and fast drums. I mean, it can be, but that's not everything that goes into every punk rock song. There are other factors. It's more about a certain attitude than an exact sound, you know? In my opinion, Woody Guthrie is punk as fuck. He said whatever he wanted to say. He didn't give a shit if he was politically correct or if everyone would agree with him. It wasn't about the marketing or the press or what was popular at the time - it was just him and his guitar singing about what he thought was wrong with the world. That's the attitude I look for when I want to hear a good punk song. Sure, the idea of "punk rock" didn't even exist during his career, but he was a major inspiration to the whole scene. Don't bother arguing with me. I honestly don't care and I'm not going to change my mind regardless of how well-informed you are...just take it or leave it.