• Picture Penzance is free to join and use. So why not join our community. As a member you can upload images, add comments, participate in our contests and connect with like minded people.
    All the best,
    Halfhidden (founder member)

  • Why not log in or join for free? Members don't see adverts on the site ;)
     

Was the 70's the best?

Halfhidden

Untouchable
Staff member
Administrator
Here am I listening to a song I've almost forgotten about since the last time I played it..... FULL BLAST!
Steeleye Span - All Around My Hat 1975. Nothing wrong with the music these days but this is a powerful masterpiece!
Were the 70's the best for music... yes or no?
 

treeve

Major Contributor
I have to disagree, there is a great deal wrong with 'modern music' in fact it is in most cases not music at all, it is an offence on the ear, it is an offence to intelligence, it is created from software, and with a high dose of cross culture interference; in the 1970s it was vibrant talented, produced using instruments, and played by musicians that either were trained, or naturally talented, and it came from that incredible reservoir of the bright minds that existed then; Beyond my other interests in Jazz, Classical, Original Blues, Blues Rock generally Rock, right up there is the music of the 70s, let alone the giants of intelligent and inventive music, Progressive Rock - Genesis, Yes, Pink Floyd .. the list is mind blowing. 'Music today appears to be emanating from the mind blown, assuming they ever had one. Get with the Status Quo.
 

Halfhidden

Untouchable
Staff member
Administrator
I agree that the Bee Gees are fab and the battle of the band started in the 70's in some kind of way ... but Lady gaga is good and waht about the classic Anastacia I'm Outta Love Now she can sing!!I don't think anyone can dismiss a decade or two because of taste. But for rock, soul and disco this was the time to be alive!
 

treeve

Major Contributor
Singers like Anastacia are as rare as chicken's teeth, and far and away above the talentless chicken feed of lady gaga and such. Anastacia stands up there as one of the all time greats, she has talent and a fine powerful musical voice. But, I add that I have not heard any modern collection of musicians produce anything of any quality or inspiration.
Ignoring the Kathryn Jenkins and Anastacias of this world, what else is there, I have tried the Radio One, and various so called music programmes and it is absolute trash. Before anyone says it, this is not an age thing, it is a music thing, anyone that doubts should have a quick scan acoss my CD collection, music to blow your socks off.
 

treeve

Major Contributor
Michael Jackson was a rare talent, perfection dogged him all the way, obsessed with producing the best. Musically he was a legend, no question, I have just about all his music here. His career began in the 1970s .....
 

Halfhidden

Untouchable
Staff member
Administrator
I do like Status Quo but as their name suggests..... nothing new has happened. They pumped out some fantastic songs and have since lived off the back of them. Unless I'm wrong the last song they wrote that hit the charts was "In the army now".
I liked the 70's because of the amazing cross section of music:
Disco
Punk
Rock
Glam
Country and western
Love songs
Rock and roll
Reggae
Soul
and loads more... quite often these types of music would be side by side in the charts... whereas earlier and later decades were dominated by a single type of music.
I feel the music scene is on the turn and today's music is becoming as flexible as the 70's.
To explain my point I'm going to attempt to associate decades:
40s Big band sound
50s Rock and Roll
60s Rock and roll + the dawn of pop music
70s ?????
80s New wave
90s dance and trance
00s ????
 

treeve

Major Contributor
Yes indeed, the last period of talented creation, Rave and Trance (of which I have a fair amount).. then it all disintegrated into meaningless drudgery. Boring boring boring. The Chopin Etudes are livelier.
 
I do like Status Quo but as their name suggests..... nothing new has happened. They pumped out some fantastic songs and have since lived off the back of them. Unless I'm wrong the last song they wrote that hit the charts was "In the army now".

And that wasn't originally them, but two South Africans called Bolland and Bolland, who lived in Holland.
(And Rockin' All Over the world was originallly John Fogerty...)
 

Halfhidden

Untouchable
Staff member
Administrator
And that wasn't originally them, but two South Africans called Bolland and Bolland, who lived in Holland.
(And Rockin' All Over the world was originallly John Fogerty...)
Well I didn't know that! This sounds a little like the Rod Hull emu story now!
 

treeve

Major Contributor
Music has been growing in complexity since Plain Song and Gregorian Chant, through various giants such as Mozart and Beethoven, Ravel and Mussorgsky, Rimsky Korsakov and Vaughan William, Bloch and Shoenberg .. then the public became aware of dance in a more expressive manner, music became looser ... Each phase was a gradual development - many motifs were borrowed across cultures, new techniques were discovered, many lines of development grew as organic creations. But, as each decade arrives, there is a maniacal generated commercial need to create new improved and in colour music. This is the age that has produced nothing of value. Merit is still understood and heard. But the Now has no expressive voice, save the incessant drivel of the death throes of the vestiges of hip hop, which used to be a celebration of poetry and street dance.

Convince me of a current 'group' that has talent (not a solo performer, they exist, and use historical merit). I think the first 'rubbish' group is Black Eyed Peas that I can recall. Then it descended into Mincing Machine R&B which has no connection with real Rhythm and Blues whatsoever. Real music from Mali or Senegal - wow. Real music from Greece or Poland - wow. But, why rush into 'new improved Gunko', when we have a world of unexplored music on tap. Convince me. :)

The symphonies of Shostakovitch set my spine tingling, as does Pink Floyd ... set my mind on fire ....
 
Last edited:

Halfhidden

Untouchable
Staff member
Administrator
Sorry been out cutting the grass.... Yes the decomposing composers!
But today I would put up "Take That" as an example of a seriously professional group. Not only have they broken up and reformed but became bigger now than they ever where. The can sing, they write their own songs (mostly).
not a solo performer
That's a real shame because the music today is dominated by single artists not groups any longer making any comparison heavily one sided.
Just take a look at the 50's 60's 70's 80's 90's and they are all dominated by groups.... sure they had solo artists but for 5 decades it was the battle of the bands and you are asking that we drop solo artist from the comparison when today solo artist make up vertually all the new music today.
 

BayOfPlenty

Member
Unless I'm wrong the last song they wrote that hit the charts was "In the army now".
You're wrong inasmuch as they didn't write that song - Rob & Ferdi Bolland wrote and recorded it as part of their 1981 album "The Domino Theory" :)

edit: I didn't see Breizh's post covering this very matter!
 
Last edited:

Halfhidden

Untouchable
Staff member
Administrator
Yes BoP, I wasn't aware that the song was written and performed by anyone other than the Quo until Breizh posted it on here. So I guess that last song must have been "Whatever you want" in that case they haven't had a new hit for 31 years!!
 

treeve

Major Contributor
@halfhidden - #14 - which rather proves the point that I am making; however, taking up your gauntlet, show me a 'single performer' (presumably with full backing orchestra (electronic or traditional)) that actually demonstrates a NEW injection into the arm of music, I have heard a number of fine singular talent, but so far they rely on tradition or previous generations or performers. Take That is rather not my cup of tea, as I had that part of my brain removed for reasons of sanity. :) Besides, they have been round for a while now. I can think of better things to have happened in 1996 - I particulary despise Robbie Williams ... show me someone good.... :)
 
Last edited:

treeve

Major Contributor
ps, it is better to be a 'decomposing composer' now they have passed on than to be a decomposing mind, or a decomposing non-composer who is supposed by all accounts to be alive. We have been lucky to have been 'given' the most complex of brains, far outstripping anything made by man; Man has not progressed much further than Babbage, the part of the equation missing is the fact that that of Babbage worked; modern chips need a kick. Music Maestro Please. :)
 

Halfhidden

Untouchable
Staff member
Administrator
I can think of better things to have happened in 1996 - I particulary despise Robbie Williams
Take that reformed in the millennium stronger, more mature than they were before... Robbie William's is not a member of Take That although he has performed with them on one occasion.
@halfhidden - #14 - which rather proves the point that I am making
I don't see your point. Are you saying that music is dying because it has developed and we have more solo artists than groups? If so I don't understand you way of thinking. The fact of the matter is that we have the technology to replicate what musicians used to do and therefore a huge amount of the backing tracks are manufactured these days. I can't see how that would make a song any less a song.
James Blunt
Kylie
Madonna (both Kylie and Madonna came back in the 00's after a long time away)
As for groups what about Radio Head or Primal Scream, Arctic Monkeys need I go on?
 

Halfhidden

Untouchable
Staff member
Administrator
Man has not progressed much further than Babbage, the part of the equation missing is the fact that that of Babbage worked; modern chips need a kick. Music Maestro Please. :)
You refer to progression yet you prefer music from the past... I'm confused.com
 
Top