Old punk

[JoleneBrody]

And maybe then we can hash out the differences between "strawberry flavored" ice cream vs "vanilla" ice cream with strawberries in it.

Vanilla ice cream with strawberries stuck in it is better classified as proto-strawberry flavoured ice cream. Post-strawberry-flavoured ice cream is often mistaken for chocolate-flavoured ice cream, but it's actually a completely different genre.

If it isn't strawberry custard, it missed the boat!

 

[Shutterbuck]

If it isn't strawberry custard, it missed the boat!

Only banana splits are served in boats. Typically banana splits are made with vanilla ice cream covered with various toppings and served between two banana halves in an oval shaped dish referred to as a "boat". Banana splits made with strawberry ice cream fall under a sub-genre of banana split known as "banana strips". Both are pretty good but you won't find them hanging out at the same ice cream shoppe.
That being said... Frozen strawberry custard and strawberry ice cream aren't quite the same thing. While I do have an opinion on which is the superior frozen treat, I respect that you may prefer frozen custard to ice cream or perhaps enjoy them equally.




It's ice cream. Ice cream is far superior to frozen custard.

 

[tomboytoy]

Crass!






And then here's a pop-punk band from Boston that I really dig (I think you can download their music for free on bandcamp or someplace like that):

 

[PunkInDrublic]

Old Green Day is pretty awesome, whatever it is.

Same with Offspring. Thought both were pretty terrible before I listened to older albums.

 

[IsabellaSnow]

I think the US may have a very different definition of the word "punk" to what they have in england... It's amazing really because if you look online for the definitions of both iggy pop and velvet underground (which were the original bands mentioned) it says they aren't punk. And even though the word proto-punk has the word punk in it, the word pretty much means "not-punk". Proto punk is NOT post punk. I don't really understand why a few of you are getting so angry about it as I don't mean it as an insult against the music. It just isn't punk and doesn't consider itself punk.

I can only assume that the word "punk" has a different meaning to you than it does to me. For me it certifies a certain type of music that by nature is loud, aggressive with a certain beat to it and is generally political by nature. And then of course the movement which again is political, anti-establishment and all about rebelling.

A band not being those things is no insult, but it seems that a lot of people here see that not calling something "punk" is some sort of insult. What's amazing is while you are telling me off for labelling things you are arguing to keep the label and acting very upset at the idea of certain bands not being allowed to have that label. If those labels don't matter then why do you really care?

I really can't be bothered to continue having this conversation, we clearly have very different ideas of what the word means. JJ you may have grown up in the modern punk scene with old punk rockers, but so did I. Being british, punk is a part of my history. We are taught it in detail in school and college. My best friend through school was a hardcore punk and was passionate about all the cultures and sub cultures, what she learned, I learned. I can only assume that the culture in the US is different to what it is in the UK.

 

[Brad]

I am 49 years old, born in January of 1965. I hated disco as it was hugely popular when I was entering my teens. Punk was my savior as it was the anti-disco music. I am no expert but to me punk was always simple chords with very short and angry songs, often played by less then stellar musicians. I understood the punk movement in England came from high unemployment and a generation that thought there was no hope for them. The safety pins for instance were used to hold torn clothing together as the true punks were also quite poor. Of course it soon became a fashion statement and was copied by those who try to set fashion trends. I don't know that I can properly describe what punk is but I do know it when I see it. Music evolves and imo just because a band was not around in the mid 70's it doesn't mean they can't be a punk rock band. And I do consider Green Day to be a punk band. I have also had people argue with me that the Ramones (who, along with the New York Dolls, influenced the punk movement in the UK btw) weren't a punk band so maybe it is just too subjective to properly quantify.
:dontknow:

PS; there is a ton of great East coast punk bands such as the Cro-Mags that are worth checking out too. And imo punk actually started on the East coast in the very early 1970s.

 

[Red7227]

I am 49 years old, born in January of 1965. I hated disco as it was hugely popular when I was entering my teens. Punk was my savior as it was the anti-disco music. I am no expert but to me punk was always simple chords with very short and angry songs, often played by less then stellar musicians. I understood the punk movement in England came from high unemployment and a generation that thought there was no hope for them. The safety pins for instance were used to hold torn clothing together as the true punks were also quite poor. Of course it soon became a fashion statement and was copied by those who try to set fashion trends. I don't know that I can properly describe what punk is but I do know it when I see it. Music evolves and imo just because a band was not around in the mid 70's it doesn't mean they can't be a punk rock band. And I do consider Green Day to be a punk band. I have also had people argue with me that the Ramones (who, along with the New York Dolls, influenced the punk movement in the UK btw) weren't a punk band so maybe it is just too subjective to properly quantify.
:dontknow:

PS; there is a ton of great East coast punk bands such as the Cro-Mags that are worth checking out too. And imo punk actually started on the East coast in the very early 1970s.

Yeah, I'm 54 and went though much the same thing, though to me punk was loud and brash and largely sucked because most of the people playing it were talentless assholes. At that time I liked a lot of different music for a lot of different reasons, some was punk - mostly The Clash and The Saints - some was ska, some was classical and a lot was pop or rock or even rockabilly. This was the age of U2 and the Divinyls, AC/DC and Hunters and Collectors. Some like They might be giants and Devo was just fucking weird. Sticking to, or being precious about, a particular genre seemed rather silly.

 

[JoleneBrody]

I think the US may have a very different definition of the word "punk" to what they have in england... It's amazing really because if you look online for the definitions of both iggy pop and velvet underground (which were the original bands mentioned) it says they aren't punk. And even though the word proto-punk has the word punk in it, the word pretty much means "not-punk". Proto punk is NOT post punk. I don't really understand why a few of you are getting so angry about it as I don't mean it as an insult against the music. It just isn't punk and doesn't consider itself punk.

I can only assume that the word "punk" has a different meaning to you than it does to me. For me it certifies a certain type of music that by nature is loud, aggressive with a certain beat to it and is generally political by nature. And then of course the movement which again is political, anti-establishment and all about rebelling.

A band not being those things is no insult, but it seems that a lot of people here see that not calling something "punk" is some sort of insult. What's amazing is while you are telling me off for labelling things you are arguing to keep the label and acting very upset at the idea of certain bands not being allowed to have that label. If those labels don't matter then why do you really care?

I really can't be bothered to continue having this conversation, we clearly have very different ideas of what the word means. JJ you may have grown up in the modern punk scene with old punk rockers, but so did I. Being british, punk is a part of my history. We are taught it in detail in school and college. My best friend through school was a hardcore punk and was passionate about all the cultures and sub cultures, what she learned, I learned. I can only assume that the culture in the US is different to what it is in the UK.

Maybe this is part of why I find this so annoying, is that Americans seem far more aware of the punk movement on a global scale than in the UK, It wasn't just in England. Things Manifested in their own way there but they were happening at the very same time in it's own way here. The street punk fashion absolutely was born in England and spread, but we aren't talking about a clothing type and fashion... we are talking about music.

More specifically a nice girl has discovered the joy of the likes of 'X' and 'Iggy' and wants to hear more like it, instead of elevating her and helping by sharing your favorites that have a similar Iggy sound (he IS the godfather of Punk for a reason, after all) Isabelle, you came in with the soul purpose of picking her apart like a bully, literally, you're post served zero purpose other than to 'correct' her. Your need to have your genres kept neat and tidy was incredibly rude and down right deflating to the OP.

That was my number one problem with this whole discussion. That elitist attitude that acts like a snobbish high school table of girls who wont let anyone sit at their table. Their are very few local punk scenes left in this world who haven't been infected by this icky disease. I was lucky to grow up in one of the best small communities on the west coast and for me, the punk rock community and scene is supposed to be far more like a loving commune than a snobby yacht club.

 

[mynameisbob84]

Maybe this is part of why I find this so annoying, is that Americans seem far more aware of the punk movement on a global scale than in the UK, It wasn't just in England.

I think most English punks are well aware of the roots of punk. They may prefer the English punk they grew up on but they're absolutely aware of the Stooges and the New York Dolls. I know one of the doods from the Destructors (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPvw_HyyZJ8), he's very much the type of person you immediately think of when thinking of crusty old English punks and certainly in the case of the scene he grew up in, the Stooges were a noted influence, so much so that they used to cover "No Fun" and "1969".

I think this is pretty much the first instance I've encountered of someone being so adamant that the Stooges aren't punk. I think most English folk (at least the English folk who I know) would categorise proto-punk bands (be it the Stooges or the MC5 or the New York Dolls or whoever) as belonging to punk music.

 

[BrokenFace]

Crass!

Yeah Crass. The real anarchists. Some good stuff and some funny protests.
Its easier just to take it straight from Wikipedia than try to remember:

The last track on Penis Envy, a parody of an MOR love song entitled "Our Wedding", was made available as a white flexi disc to readers of Loving, a teenage romance magazine. Crass tricked the magazine into offering the disc, posing as "Creative Recording And Sound Services". Loving accepted the offer, telling their readers that the free Crass flexi would make "your wedding day just that bit extra special"

And from the same anarcho-punk stable; Flux of Pink Indians with one of my favourites:

 

[BrokenFace]

Maybe this is part of why I find this so annoying, is that Americans seem far more aware of the punk movement on a global scale than in the UK, It wasn't just in England.

I think most English punks are well aware of the roots of punk. They may prefer the English punk they grew up on but they're absolutely aware of the Stooges and the New York Dolls. I know one of the doods from the Destructors (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPvw_HyyZJ8), he's very much the type of person you immediately think of when thinking of crusty old English punks and certainly in the case of the scene he grew up in, the Stooges were a noted influence, so much so that they used to cover "No Fun" and "1969".

I think this is pretty much the first instance I've encountered of someone being so adamant that the Stooges aren't punk. I think most English folk (at least the English folk who I know) would categorise proto-punk bands (be it the Stooges or the MC5 or the New York Dolls or whoever) as belonging to punk music.

It's all very nuanced, at one point you're saying "punk" and another "belonging to punk music".
I'd say The Clash were as influenced by Gene Vincent and Lee 'scratch' Perry as by the New York Dolls.
It doesn't make either of the first two Punk.

One of the problems is that proto-punk is a purely retrospective term.
Some people obviously view 'punk' as the root of a taxonomy with sub-genres spanning 30 years beneath it.
Others would view the term as referring much more to the explosion of bands, culture, labels, fanzines around 1976-79.

I see no problem in asking the OP what was intended, or as has been pointed out the thread just becomes "Name lots of bands".

 

[Red7227]

I see no problem in asking the OP what was intended, or as has been pointed out the thread just becomes "Name lots of bands".

The OPs question was "name lots of bands" Wankers aside, we have the covered.

 

[Sevrin]

One of the problems is that proto-punk is a purely retrospective term.

There's nothing so special about punk music. To give a bit of perspective, Bach and Vivaldi are often lumped in with "classical music", even though the term wasn't commonly used for another 200 years after they lived. Some people say baroque music is classical, some say it isn't. Does it matter?

I see no problem in asking the OP what was intended, or as has been pointed out the thread just becomes "Name lots of bands".

The OPs question was "name lots of bands" Wankers aside, we have the covered.

Pretty much. I understood it as "I like these guys. What other guys do y'all think I'd like?" She wasn't doing research for a thesis.

 

[JoleneBrody]

Maybe this is part of why I find this so annoying, is that Americans seem far more aware of the punk movement on a global scale than in the UK, It wasn't just in England.

I think most English punks are well aware of the roots of punk. They may prefer the English punk they grew up on but they're absolutely aware of the Stooges and the New York Dolls. I know one of the doods from the Destructors (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPvw_HyyZJ8), he's very much the type of person you immediately think of when thinking of crusty old English punks and certainly in the case of the scene he grew up in, the Stooges were a noted influence, so much so that they used to cover "No Fun" and "1969".

I think this is pretty much the first instance I've encountered of someone being so adamant that the Stooges aren't punk. I think most English folk (at least the English folk who I know) would categorise proto-punk bands (be it the Stooges or the MC5 or the New York Dolls or whoever) as belonging to punk music.

You are right. That was ignorant and judgmental of me. The few I've known had similar stuck up ways, but I have only known a very small few and not nearly enough to properly deduce such a blanket statement. Thank you for pointing that out to me Bob.

I've said my peace and in honor of the nice OP, will post awesome bands that I think you will love whenever one pops in my head!

Here's one I think you'll love if you love the stooges! JOHNNY THUNDERS! He played with the New York Dolls but his solo stuff and The Heartbreakers sometimes go under the radar, and it's just great!

 

[Eden01]

I think the US may have a very different definition of the word "punk" to what they have in england... It's amazing really because if you look online for the definitions of both iggy pop and velvet underground (which were the original bands mentioned) it says they aren't punk. And even though the word proto-punk has the word punk in it, the word pretty much means "not-punk". Proto punk is NOT post punk. I don't really understand why a few of you are getting so angry about it as I don't mean it as an insult against the music. It just isn't punk and doesn't consider itself punk.

I can only assume that the word "punk" has a different meaning to you than it does to me. For me it certifies a certain type of music that by nature is loud, aggressive with a certain beat to it and is generally political by nature. And then of course the movement which again is political, anti-establishment and all about rebelling.

A band not being those things is no insult, but it seems that a lot of people here see that not calling something "punk" is some sort of insult. What's amazing is while you are telling me off for labelling things you are arguing to keep the label and acting very upset at the idea of certain bands not being allowed to have that label. If those labels don't matter then why do you really care?

I really can't be bothered to continue having this conversation, we clearly have very different ideas of what the word means. JJ you may have grown up in the modern punk scene with old punk rockers, but so did I. Being british, punk is a part of my history. We are taught it in detail in school and college. My best friend through school was a hardcore punk and was passionate about all the cultures and sub cultures, what she learned, I learned. I can only assume that the culture in the US is different to what it is in the UK.

Maybe this is part of why I find this so annoying, is that Americans seem far more aware of the punk movement on a global scale than in the UK, It wasn't just in England. Things Manifested in their own way there but they were happening at the very same time in it's own way here. The street punk fashion absolutely was born in England and spread, but we aren't talking about a clothing type and fashion... we are talking about music.

More specifically a nice girl has discovered the joy of the likes of 'X' and 'Iggy' and wants to hear more like it, instead of elevating her and helping by sharing your favorites that have a similar Iggy sound (he IS the godfather of Punk for a reason, after all) Isabelle, you came in with the soul purpose of picking her apart like a bully, literally, you're post served zero purpose other than to 'correct' her. Your need to have your genres kept neat and tidy was incredibly rude and down right deflating to the OP.

That was my number one problem with this whole discussion. That elitist attitude that acts like a snobbish high school table of girls who wont let anyone sit at their table. Their are very few local punk scenes left in this world who haven't been infected by this icky disease. I was lucky to grow up in one of the best small communities on the west coast and for me, the punk rock community and scene is supposed to be far more like a loving commune than a snobby yacht club.

Jolene, I seriously didn't want an argument with you. So I apologise if I came across as a fucktard. I wasn't saying I dislike any of the bands I mentioned, in fact I like most of them, and love Blink 182, I'm enjoying the links everyone is posting. I also don't think being punk has anything to do with chart placement! Sorry if my views seem 'elitist punk' and the attitude comes across as an icky disease! All I can say that is if you have come across this attitude before, there must be a few people who believe it, so for some it is a valid point of view. I'm not saying it's a popular one, just a belief held by some.

I think Isabella is right and that the English view of Punk is different from the US, and that's where the contention is coming from. I'm in Australia though, so hopefully have a global view! I of course think there are punk bands form every corner of the world.

the punk rock community and scene is supposed to be far more like a loving commune than a snobby yacht club.

You see, I guess it's more this I can't reconcile with what I have knows as punk culture. The situation you describe is brilliant and a wonderful, and I'm sure was amazing to be part of. But neither 'loving commune' or 'snobby yacht club' is close to how I would describe the punk movement.

Anarchy and rebellion born from poverty and not much hope for the future, and hatred of just about everything - society, media, governments, parents, life. A fast, hard, angry music being a release from the hardships of life. I would not wish anyone to have to live in the kind of society I'm talking about. Of course you can play the exact same style of music, but can't you see how people that lived through that might get upset when others say 'Oh, I'm a punk'? It's kind of an oxymoron isn't it, the people who say they lived the worst of life, now being called elitist. I luckily have never lived like that myself, but have had it described to me a few times from old rockers that did live it.

we aren't talking about a clothing type and fashion... we are talking about music.

Again here is where we are having a misunderstanding. I am looking at punk holistically as a cultural epoch rather than just a style of music, though I guess you are to, to some extent if you are saying how the punk rock community and scene are suppose to behave. Can I ask, how exactly do you view, or would you describe the Punk movement I am talking about? For me it is 'Punk', and everything outside this is a subset, or split off from the genre. Again, so you don't take offence, I am not saying that any of the subsets are bad, just different.

If you have every read or seen the movie High Fidelity, that is a big chunk of my life - some of it uncannily so. So yes, in some ways I would be the Comic Book Guy of music to you. But that is a huge compliment to me, not an insult. So I am looking at this as someone outside the scene, that has intimate knowledge of it from dealing for decades with people who live it and have an amazing passion for it. People love and are passionate for every conceivable style of music, but I have to say that nothing quite matches the level of passion and dedication I have seen for Punk movement.

 

[Sevrin]

Old punk rockers.

 

[JoleneBrody]

Old punk rockers.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

This post single handily made this entire silliness seem worth it.

 

[Sienna]

Oh my gosh I am so sorry I just saw all of this. Haha I guess next time I won't throw around the term "punk" so lightly. For me old school punk has always been Velvet Underground, Nico, Iggy, and New York Dolls. I'll clarify next time, or just not even use the "p" word. Thanks everyone.

 

[PunkInDrublic]

Not super old and maybe not all that punk to some but I love these albums.

 

[HarmlessSquirrel]

Okay, only recently returned here, so I missed the beginning of this but (and almost, by definition in this thread, I'm spewing my own biases, but anyway...

If the Ramones weren't punk, punk never existed.

If the Buzzcocks made the charts, it was because there was a random surge in decent taste, not because they weren't punk.

And, of fucking course, what matters in music is if it's any damned good, not what category it goes in.

 

[Lilith Vine]

I understand everyone has very different opinions, but I will never understand genres. What is punk, rap, heavy metal or whatever to one person may not be to someone else. I love old Green Day because I love their music, not because they are classified by what somewhat thinks. I think people get way too caught up genres, and arguments happen that don't even really matter. Why can't you just enjoy the band without the label? I get that the genres are there for a reason and I even classify certain bands where I believe they fit. For example, I have my metal music, and I have what I would consider just regular rock music. I don't break it down into heavy metal, death metal, punk, classic or whatever else. It's just really good music.

 

[PunkInDrublic]