British Rock vs American Rock.

[Julian B]

That's the most cogent description I've seen from someone of that era about Kiss... a very simple, honest and positive reflection/opinion.

Thanks I try and keep a perspective with my feelings towards the music of Kiss. Maybe it's because I'm a Libra but although I love them, their music and just how much a part of my life they were/are, I'm still able to recognise their distinct limitations.

I'll still always honour my promise to myself as a kid though... I want 'World Without Heroes' played at my funeral.

Yeah, I've got some Merrymakers stuff... good stuff. Sturmer also produced last year's Puffy Aim Yumi album Nice... a kinda poppy album that's of 2 young Japanese teenyboppers... it's actually very good. Seemed a little lightweight after the first few cuts, but it grows on me. Certainly Sturmer is the reason... his fingerprints are all over it.

Andy Sturmer is a power pop genius. Puffy's 'Nice' is a breath of fresh air, so innocent and meaningless in many ways but somehow profound because of it (a little like Kiss/GFR in some ways - maybe that's the connection we're hearing and enjoying?). 'Tokyo Nights' and'Your Love Is A Drug' are just amazing pop songs, from ANY era or ANY country.

AC/DC aren't particularly Australian by the way, Bon Scott and both the Young brothers were all born in Scotland, UK.

[Dave_G]

I guess what I was saying that like the Euro bands, I also like bands a lot from other lands other that the states.

And I think the Enz are actually New Zelanders.

Dave

[Smokey]

Look like any type of comparison I am doing between British and American is end up on a dead end.

So would you all say that a [solid] comparison can not be made between two except may be European Rock being more "arty"?

[Jim Clark]

Look like any type of comparison I am doing between British and American is end up on a dead end.

So would you all say that a [solid] comparison can not be made between two except may be European Rock being more "arty"?

Well, that was a weak description but seemed the best way to get across what I was attempting to say. On the other hand, some of the examples you listed seem to fall in along those lines. Pink Floyd and most certainly Bowie and Roxy Music could conceivably be considered more dramatic or 'arty'. Of course lots of others might could be described similarly without any obvious American counterparts.

As I said, it was weak.

jc

[Julian B]

So would you all say that a [solid] comparison can not be made between two except may be European Rock being more "arty"?

I don't see it that way, if anything, I'd say a lot of Bristish rock is very working class, 'meat and potatoes' type music. Motorhead, Iron Maiden, The Who, Black Sabbath etc. are all very straight ahead. Maybe the likes of Deep Purple, Rainbow, ELO etc. have a more classical music/technical feel to them but it's still fairly basic stuff.

I think the differences are more in presentation. As I mentioned above, Kiss are based around music influences predominently from the Rolling Stones, The Beatles and The Who - but it's packaged in a look that is as far removed from those three bands as it's possible to be.

The look of bands such as Twisted Sister, WASP, Poison, Ratt, Motley Crue is also much more of an American rock image, yet a lot of their music is also based around the early UK rock bands styles as well as on the likes of Kiss, who'd already presented their take on the early UK rock sound.

UK rock bands traditionally display a substance over style attitude (which is not to say they're actually any better musically than US rock bands) whilst US rock bands tend to favour a balance of both or go all out in the style department.

This changed somewhat during the Grunge/90s American rock scene, where bands would almost religiously dispense with 'image' and concentrate on their music and lyrics - and in doing so, ironically, created a whole new image.

It's interesting that, coming full circle, the only really big new UK rock band is The Darkness - who combine the musical elements of meat and potatoes bands like AC/DC and Thin Lizzy with the flamboyance of Queen and a more 'glam' look.

From the US scene, the biggest rock bands are probably Marilyn Manson / Slipknot (the Kiss/glam/theatrical connection), The Strokes (the Grunge connection) and The White Stripes (the Blues/R&B/70s connection).

Nothing really changes huh?

[Smokey]

UK rock bands traditionally display a substance over style attitude (which is not to say they're actually any better musically than US rock bands) whilst US rock bands tend to favour a balance of both or go all out in the style department.

This changed somewhat during the Grunge/90s American rock scene, where bands would almost religiously dispense with 'image' and concentrate on their music and lyrics - and in doing so, ironically, created a whole new image.

There is alot of truth to that, especially during late 80s. American bands you mentioned such as Winger, Motly Crue, Poison, Warrant, Zebra, Whitesnake, etc., were more about style than music. We used to call them "hair bands"

DuranDuran might be the only band that did both (Style and music) very well.

[MindGoneHaywire]

Julian B:

UK rock bands traditionally display a substance over style attitude (which is not to say they're actually any better musically than US rock bands) whilst US rock bands tend to favour a balance of both or go all out in the style department.

Smokey:

There is alot of truth to that, especially during late 80s. American bands you mentioned such as Winger, Motly Crue, Poison, Warrant, Zebra, Whitesnake, etc., were more about style than music.

Disagree. For every hair metal band there was a Replacements, a Minutemen, a Husker Du, a Sonic Youth, a Soul Asylum, a Meat Puppets, and most especially R.E.M. With the exception of the Minutemen, by the end of the decade, every single one of these bands was on a major label, so it's not like I'm talking about bands that were only pressing 100 copies of their records. This is another example of these generalizations being easy to refute, Smokey. Like I said, if they work for you, that's great. If I want to create an aesthetic divide by listing 5 U.S. bands & 5 U.K. bands & identifying specific characteristics to strengthen the generalization, it's not that hard. But if I want to shred the argument, in most cases, it's not that difficult to do, either. There's a lot of this stuff in this thread that I just don't buy; there are certainly bits & pieces of truth in some of them, but by & large they remain simple generalizations. Jim was right when he called it weak. No offense--I don't think it's really that big a deal. But there's just so much cross-pollenization that I don't think the generalities hold up.

Julian B:

The look of bands such as Twisted Sister, WASP, Poison, Ratt, Motley Crue is also much more of an American rock image

It's straight out of the New York Dolls, a late incarnation of whom WASP's Blackie Lawless actually played in. Some might say Aerosmith or KISS, but if you look at the late 80s hair metal bands, most of whom were American, you'll see that the look they're going for first & foremost had already been captured by Hanoi Rocks...who conveniently shared the trait with the Dolls of having been heard by very few people in the U.S. There was a band that was, to my ears, qualified to continue the legacy of the Dolls, and it wasn't Hanoi Rocks, it was Guns N' Roses. For one album, anyway. If anyone wants to lump them in with the hair metal bands, be my guest. I respectfully disagree.

[Julian B]

American bands you mentioned such as... Whitesnake, etc., were more about style than music. We used to call them "hair bands"

Now there's a very interesting one... Whitesnake started life as a poor man's Led Zepplin and were very much a UK band and very much not a glam band

They then mutated into the archetypal 80s hair band, although I believe the members were still mainly British. You would be forgiven for thinking they were a US band though - which I'm sure was Coverdale's intention.

While I agree with MindGoneHaywire that for every Pretty Boy Floyd there was a Sonic Youth, it was the drag queens that ruled the charts and MTV during the late 80s and early 90s. Even in the UK those bands were huge whilst the more underground bands you mention only really caught people's attention once Nirvana hit big.

As for Guns N Roses, one of the best shows I've ever been to was at the Bristol Colston Hall in October 1987, when they were virrtually unknown here. I agree, they were most definitely not a typical glam/hair band. Their energy was absolutely incredible. Faster Pussycat supported and they weren't half bad either.

[Dusty Chalk]

So would you all say that a [solid] comparison can not be made between two except may be European Rock being more "arty"?

No, I wouldn't even go that far.

DaveG -- yeah, they all talk funny, dagburn for'ners.