Truck Month Spring Reading 2016 Amazon Fashion Learn more nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc $5 Albums Fire TV with 4k Ultra HD Beauty Mother's Day Gifts Amazon Gift Card Offer ctstrph2 ctstrph2 ctstrph2  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Fire, Only $39.99 Kindle Paperwhite UniOrlando Spring Arrivals in Outdoor Clothing SnS
Customer Discussions > Music forum

A Musical & Social Chronology of the 60s to Experience For Yourself!


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 101-123 of 123 posts in this discussion
Posted on Sep 1, 2012 2:50:33 PM PDT
@werranth413: that ties it, you MUST be a record executive. ;)

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 1, 2012 3:48:10 PM PDT
Roeselare says:
heh, no but I might have some bitter feelings about what I've seen from these garage bands making it, with the antics and gimmicks and the drivel they've put out there. Educators and budgets shouldn't take all the blame for the sad state of the general audience for music today.

Posted on Sep 1, 2012 5:36:25 PM PDT
@werranth413:

OK. 10-year-olds may be a little extreme, although change it to 18 or 25 year olds and the principle is still the same.

But I do get your point about relatively untalented acts raking in the megabucks while much more talented & deserving artists struggle.

Coincidentally, just last night on the "Reality Show", "Shark Tank", some promoter showcased a fairly mediocre Rock Band seeking Investment Capital. He didn't get it, but it probably doesn't matter because the 15 minutes of Prime Time National Exposure was worth far more than the investment he was asking for! A Pretty Ingenious Marketing tactic!

No one is saying that Record Executives and Investors don't contribute to the process and deserve a reasonable profit accordingly.

But if you really want to understand the sort of Record Industry abuses that Michael Topper & I are bristling about, read "Without You: The Tragic Story of Badfinger".

Without You: The Tragic Story of Badfinger

Though I wouldn't pay the $600.00 that one seller is asking for a Hardcover copy!

Posted on Sep 1, 2012 5:41:30 PM PDT
One listen to "Lola Vs.Powerman And The Moneygoround Pt.1", the album that started this whole thread tangent about the music biz, would also do the trick. The album is almost entirely autobiographical, even down to using the real names of the group's managers and accountants on the song "The Moneygoround". Actually, that one two-minute song in itself encapsulates the theme of the entire record.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 2, 2012 9:19:32 AM PDT
Roeselare says:
If the musical acts form and shape their audiences, and not the other way around, it's interesting how this rock history might be perceived and recorded by future critics. Did the musical education level of the pop audience begin to rise with the first main stream crossover Black singers and begin to fall with the murder of John? Is this how historians will see it, even though they weren't born yet? I wasn't so aware of it at the time, I just remember not relating to disco and the nasty post-disco experiments.

How is it that we generally find both the music before our time AND the latest music unattractive?

How would we describe this 'era', the present musical landscape of recordings? Too many cooks spoil the broth?

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 2, 2012 10:13:34 AM PDT
Severin says:
I grew up in the '70s and back-filled the '60s music. We were fed '60s music in grammar school, Dylan, Joni Mitchell, etc. The '70s music seemed bad to me at the time but seemed great when the '80s came along. The '80s seemed sub-par until the '90s came along. There was so much innovation in the '60s and '70s and there was a huge audience for it because of the baby boom that's it's become the yardstick by which all other eras are measured. For the current generation this "old" music is like archeology. I have little use for most of today's music, cant's stand rap/hip-hop, don't care for country or neo-country, no heavy metal or industrial noise. It seems like there was a lot more talent back then but today anyone can be a music artist, just get on YouTube or American Idol or put your songs on the net for free download.

Posted on Sep 2, 2012 10:39:22 AM PDT
alysha25 says:
It's my belief that the audiences form and shape the musical acts , as much as the musical acts form and shape the audiences.

I grew up in the 70's also. I also thought 80's music in particular was terrible! Looking back now, I can appreciate it more, in a cool retro way.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 2, 2012 10:44:59 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Sep 2, 2012 10:49:22 AM PDT
DKPete says:
Donald, as far as the mainstream Pop charts go (which people like The Beatles, Elton John, Bowie, Stones, Dylan were all a part of), for the most part, there are no musical ARTISTS these days-only musical CREATIONS with the literal push of a few buttons.

The reason there was "innovation" back then is because the nature of the times and the available recording equipment demanded it. Would you appreciate Strawberry Fields Forever as a work of artistic brilliance if you didn't know of the laborious invention which went behind it?? I'd say, probably not...and this, in fact, is why most average younger music listeners nowadays CANNOT even begin to appreciate that record (and others of the time period) to its' fullest.

Posted on Sep 2, 2012 11:23:52 AM PDT
Dr. Mikey says:
w'413: It goes both ways. Not only do musical acts form and shape their audiences, but they are in turn shaped by and react to their culture. This forum started as an exploration of the 60s. We have pretty well uncovered the reasons the music took the shape and directions it did. (Of course we've had decades of hindsight. In 40-50 years will today's "musical landscape" be more understandable? I have my doubts.) A major dynamic of the '60s was the growth of a counterculture in reaction against the Vietnam War and a desire for personal freedom for individuals and liberation for groups previously oppressed. You also mention crossover Black singers being accepted. Much of the history of "our own" music was taught to us by English white boys who understood and appreciated our own heritage (as expressed in blues and R&B, for example) better than we did. And then they and American kids who picked up on the idea took the music even further with additional rhythms and more contemporary political themes reflecting the changing culture. Technology was also important -- 45s and LPs, FM radio stations that played longer songs -- allowed us to experiment.

Things seem different today. If you ask people of "my" generation to identitify one or two "moments" that are memorable and signficant to them, they seem to have a common understanding of "public" events -- the Kennedy assassination, Beatles appearance on Sullivan, discovery of psychotropic drugs (used in a GROUP setting), Woodstock, Kent State, M.L King, civil rights, etc. I have asked my students for quite some time about this, and they have great difficulty finding something in common which binds their generation together.

Today, individualism means the ability to shut out the reality we don't like. Technology allows us to download thousands of songs we like without regard to any artistic intent of people who may be smarter or more sensitive than us (the musicians and artists). We are victims of our own preferences and therefore begin to lose the ability to learn and grow. The techological advances are great in producing indie groups, but what criteria should determine what is "good." In some ways it's good that we have that choice, but without ever having been exposed to a culture of critical thnking, the result is the most sensational, outrageous, or lowest common denominator form of entertainment. Maybe the "too many cooks" idea belongs here. Or maybe we have lost the ability to ask "what does good food taste like, anyway?" Beginning in the 80s and still with us is the idea that individualism does not have a counterpart in communalism. Laissez-faire economics and "self-centered" materialism have almost eroded any sense of public purpose, which one of our political parties has almost totally abandoned and the other is really confused about. (Margaret Thatcher famously commented that there was no such thing as "society.") This every person for himself mentality shows up not only in increasing levels of economic inequality, but in music and culture as well. The result seems to be political and artistic confusion right now.

Posted on Sep 2, 2012 1:48:46 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Sep 2, 2012 1:59:23 PM PDT
alysha25 says:
Dr. Mikey, I agree with most of what you said. I don't think the overwhelming difference of Technology Now, Vs. Then can even be expressed enough. It's just the tip of the iceburg. Standing in a room, at work, out at a resterant , anywhere, anytime, other people are interacting more with their cell phones than the people around them.

Also I feel a huge difference that Materialism makes from the 60's vs. now. Then there's the internet. Again if you weren't around Before the internet , it might be hard to even imagine the difference, however at least in my mind there's a Huge difference. Everything you talk about, materialism, laissez-faire economics, ability to shut out reality , economic inequality, the ability to download or buy anything online, maybe it's a political and artistic confusion. Or maybe ultimately it's making things Dull. I noticed a trend of "dull" music being in fashion now. I can relate to the feeling. Sorry to be a downer.

As for "lowest common denominator" entertainment, that is partially T.V. stations to blame though, as far as T.V. shows. It's Cheaper to put on all those reality shows than pay Real actors. Still - I enjoy some of those "sensational , outrageous" acts! And I think there Is talent out there.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 2, 2012 4:28:09 PM PDT
Severin says:
Manufactured groups have been around a long time. Weren't there multiple groups of the Weavers touring at the same time in the '60s? I may have the name wrong. The Monkees, Partridge Family and the Sex Pistols were manufactured. Paula Abdul and Milli Vanilli released albums on which they didn't do the primary singing or didn't sing at all. Later came Bananarama, Spice Girls, the Pipettes and a slew of boy bands.

These days fashion seems to matter more than music ability, artists have to shock to grab headlines (blame Madonna). American Idol and its clones don't help, it's a retrogression to the days of crooners. In the '60s there were a couple hundred bands, today there are tens of thousands. And there's more history now, a musical legacy to dig through. It's too easy to be a pop star these days, it isn't earned, it isn't important and it won't have a lasting impact. Us oldsters have piles of LPs and CDs but the younger generation will just empty their iPod or hard drive, wipe it out. It's disposable culture.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 2, 2012 5:19:36 PM PDT
Roeselare says:
Yes, very astute. I think you've answered my question (which I had assumed was unanswerable without a decade or two of perspective) by saying it's in confusion right now, because of all the technological changes and crosscurrents AND the loss of that indescribable something that attracted an earlier generation to 'better' music (more memorable, more inspiring with loftier ideas, more clever according to music theory and the history of musical development).

But, then, I think of what my grandparents must have thought about me when I was young and was growing to love the youth music that they surely heard as vulgar or harsh or childish.

As a student of music history, I can point to this same generational interaction between the early baroque vs what JS Bach wanted to do, -- and then Bach and Handel vs Mozart and Haydn, -- and then Haydn vs Beethoven (Mozart had already died).

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 2, 2012 5:28:10 PM PDT
Roeselare says:
"..maybe it's a political and artistic confusion. Or maybe ultimately it's making things Dull. I noticed a trend of "dull" music being in fashion now. I can relate to the feeling. Sorry to be a downer."

As I say in many of these music threads, and get attacked for being off topic or worse, the most reliable way to continue to enjoy music through the changing decades, is to invest the time and play music yourself. It helps with every aspect of appreciation and categorizing all available types of music.

Posted on Sep 2, 2012 5:34:30 PM PDT
While I certainly agree that the rise of the internet and ipod have made the experience of listening to music less social and more compartmentalized than ever before, there have been new advantages brought on by the technological innovations as well. It is *so* much easier for me to find music, including obscure artists I would have never found otherwise, and music tailored to my individual tastes--and almost all of it I can instantly sample for free first before I buy. Also, forums like this provide a great place for discussion and exchange of musical knowledge.

It's not so much the technology itself that is to blame, it's the way in which people use it. Most people have welcomed the advent of the ipod and downloading as a means of reducing music to a background experience that can be shut on and off, with individual songs taking priority over albums and no real social interaction around it--but it doesn't have to be that way at all.

Posted on Sep 2, 2012 6:50:42 PM PDT
Cyberian, I enjoyed reading your original list and think you did a great job compiling such a short yet complete list to encompass ten years of rapid change.

The only complaint I have with it is that it lacks a female perspective (other than Be My Baby). I would suggest You Don't Own Me by Leslie Gore. In the mid-sixties this song reflected a growing sense of self-awareness among teenage girls as the Women's Movement was just in its beginning stages.

Posted on Sep 2, 2012 10:13:01 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Sep 3, 2012 9:40:42 AM PDT
Heavy work demands pulled me away for a couple of days and I see some really interesting thoughts have been posted in my absence, so I just wanted to briefly weigh in on a couple of them.

@MissMiscellanea:

I totally agree that your suggestion of Lesley Gore's "You Don't Own Me" is EXCELLENT. I had completely forgotten about that one and the fact that it predates Aretha's "Respect" by over 3 years makes it certainly one of, if not THE First Musical Assertion of Feminism. (At least I can't think of an earlier one at the moment.)

So I would definitely be inclined to replace "Respect" with "You Don't Own Me" on the 50 song playlist. It would fall Chronologically at November 1963, right after Dylan's "The Times They Are A-Changing".

Incidentally, I have since timed out the 50 Song Playlist and found that "Disc 1" is about 4 Minutes too long while "Disc 2" is about 18 minutes too long! Since the iPod is apparently rendering CDs obsolete anyway, I'll leave it up to those who want to burn their playlists to Discs to edit their own lists for themselves, especially since I assume people are likely going to want to tweak it somewhat for their own personalization anyway.

@Michael Topper:

Thank you for the You Tube link of "Arthur".

At the risk of sounding as out-of-touch as I actually am, I had NO Idea that entire Albums were available on You Tube!
Can't people just Download them and save them to their Hard Drives somehow???

I've generally shied away from things like You Tube, Facebook, Twitter etc. because I see them as potentially HUGE Time-Wasters.
In fact, I've already spent WAAAAAYYYY more time on these Discussion Threads than I would have preferred. Although, if I'm truly honest, I suspect that a large part of my motivation has been as a Distraction in order to Procrastinate addressing a rather overwhelming "To-Do" List! I SHOULD have been spending the last 2 weeks cleaning my garage rather than pondering 40 year old musical trends! But it wouldn't have been nearly as interesting!

Anyway, back to the Kinks. I like this album very much! As I mentioned, I do recall hearing this on release in 1969 and even reading about how it was an intended Soundtrack. I suspect that, in my mind anyway, it was simply overshadowed by contemporary releases like "Abbey Road" & "Tommy", although, listening now, I'm hearing things that I prefer over parts of "Tommy". Since You Tube isn't telling me what song I'm hearing, I'm not sure, but I'm hearing some excellent vocal harmonies, which is always a major selling point for me!

These Deluxe Editions look great and the involvement of Andrew Sandoval usually means an excellent product. Although the price tag of about $30.00 each is the same factor that has kept me from adding the Moody Blues' 2-Disc Deluxe Imports to my Collection. I keep hoping for a Domestic Release and checking the stock of the few remaining Used CD stores in the area.

But you've convinced me that I should probably own these as well!

@DKPete:

I definitely agree re: Strawberry Fields Forever.

I recall when the single came out in 1967 and the Universal Reaction of virtually EVERYONE upon hearing it for the first time was a jaw-dropping "What was THAT???"! The same with the Backwards Vocal sound on "Rain"!

I DISTINCTLY Remember how ODD "Ticket To Ride" sounded to me the first time I heard it! In 1965, with that unique Drum pattern, Nothing had EVER sounded like that before! As I said in my First Post at the very beginning of this thread, just hearing The Beatles' recorded output in Chronological Sequence is a Musical Education in itself!

@Donald J. Nelson:

"Us oldsters have piles of LPs and CDs but the younger generation will just empty their iPod or hard drive, wipe it out. It's disposable culture."
I found this to be a very Chilling and Frightening thought! And probably very True!

I will say this regarding American Idol and its ilk, though: I don't think Music Competitions are necessarily bad per se. Abba won the Eurovision Song Contest and as far back as the early 50s, Patsy Cline got her start on "Arthur Godfrey's Talent Scouts".

The problem I have with "American Idol" and others, is the emphasis on "Idol" as the goal in and of itself over actually having anything meaningful to say musically or artistically. Too much emphasis is placed on appearances or stage presence or choreography and other things that are incidental to the music itself. Sadly, major talents like Janis Joplin or Mama Cass would probably be eliminated in the first round!

@werranth413:

I'm sure you're probably right about the generational thing and extending it back to Bach & Mozart.

My Aunt grew up in the mid 50s so her record collection included the likes of Patti Page, Frank Sinatra & Pat Boone.
I've often wondered whether my Grandmother ever yelled at her to "Turn that Noise Off!"

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 3, 2012 10:14:46 AM PDT
@werranth413:

I Think "Dull" is in the Ear of the Beholder. I agree much of it sounds dull to me too, but that comes after 50+ years of hearing music. I doubt it sounds "dull" to young listeners.

For example, someone posted a thread claiming that the current "Some Nights" by Fun had plagiarized "Simon & Garfunkel's" "Cecilia". Definite similarities, but "fresh" and "new" to younger listeners.

I recall in 1965 I LOVED Beatles VI and especially the vocal harmonies on "Words Of Love". I had no idea at the time that this was a cover of an older song and was shocked to discover, years later, that they had pretty much just duplicated Buddy Holly's original!

I agree that playing an instrument aids in music appreciation. I was in High School in 1969 and took a course in Music Theory which gave me whole new perspective on the music of the day. I distinctly recall studying the Bach influences on "Let It Be"! It gave me a greater understanding & appreciation of that song and many others.

Posted on Sep 3, 2012 10:26:57 AM PDT
alysha25 says:
"Cyberian Husky,

I've generally shied away from things like You Tube, Facebook, Twitter etc. because I see them as potentially HUGE Time-Wasters.
In fact, I've already spent WAAAAAYYYY more time on these Discussion Threads than I would have preferred. Although, if I'm truly honest, I suspect that a large part of my motivation has been as a Distraction in order to Procrastinate addressing a rather overwhelming "To-Do" List! I SHOULD have been spending the last 2 weeks cleaning my garage rather than pondering 40 year old musical trends! But it wouldn't have been nearly as interesting!"

The internet , and message boards are the drug of the 21st century.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 3, 2012 10:31:03 AM PDT
alysha25:

"The internet , and message boards are the drug of the 21st century."

So I've discovered. And I think I'm about to go "Cold Turkey"!

Posted on Sep 3, 2012 10:32:06 AM PDT
alysha25 says:
Good Luck with that! And let us know how it goes! Have fun in the garage.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 3, 2012 10:35:25 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Sep 5, 2012 6:57:01 AM PDT
Roeselare says:
Yes, as with any subject, and any language, reducing the complexities down into basic and easily understood parts helps immensely when you have it all back together. Also, there's nothing like participation and self-expression and interpreting a song from your own experience.

Music is the only subject in which an 80 year old can expect to learn something new everyday (if they've invested the time and effort all the way along).

Posted on Sep 3, 2012 1:45:40 PM PDT
Cyberian Husky: "And I think I'm about to go "Cold Turkey"!"

I'm still happily addicted. But thanks for starting the thread, it's been fun! I hope you relapse at some point or other. ;)

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 3, 2012 2:58:10 PM PDT
Severin says:
I agree, this has been an interesting thread. I printed out the list and will make some revisions (I have about 80 of these songs in my collection) and make a couple of discs.
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the Music forum

  Discussion Replies Latest Post
Song Game - Part III 5233 10 seconds ago
Prince dead at 57 651 1 minute ago
Forget the Charts: Rank Your Favorite Songs by Any Artists 202 4 minutes ago
Musical Diary 2812 7 minutes ago
★The Music of Our Lives 6.3★ 3710 12 minutes ago
What Are You Listening To? (Volume Four) 1892 15 minutes ago
2016 28 30 minutes ago
The Ten Best Rock Albums Ever Made 259 1 hour ago
Philip Norman's Changed His Mind About Paul McCartney 33 1 hour ago
What are you listening right now? 2683 2 hours ago
Hot 100 Playlists 18 3 hours ago
Bulletin Board ---- What's in the news? 337 6 hours ago
 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Music forum
Participants:  13
Total posts:  123
Initial post:  Aug 26, 2012
Latest post:  Sep 3, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 3 customers

Search Customer Discussions