Harmony Central Forums
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.

The 60s and early 70s

Collapse



X
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The 60s and early 70s

    I was born in 1964, so according to conventional wisdom the musical era which should have defined me was late 70s to early 80s. However, I think that the 60s and early 70s were by far the best, most interesting and innovative period in pop and rock. The Beatles, Hendrix, Led Zep, Zappa, Bowie, Stones etc. This was ground-breaking stuff. Rock 'n' roll evolved from ritual dance music to something you might want to actually listen to. Am I ploughing a lonely furrow here?
    Last edited by Pastor of Muppets; 08-13-2016, 09:22 AM. Reason: Forgot about Bowie

  • #2
    Add Yes, Moody Blues, Vanilla Fudge, King Crimson, Jethro Tull, Gino Vanelli, ELP, and quite a few others that I'll think of as soon as I click "post", and you get the most musically complex rock music of all time. Some of which borders on Classical music in structure.

    Personally, I think that was rock's peak.

    Not that there wasn't good stuff before and after, but it seems like it was the golden era of rock music from this musician's point of view.

    Bot everyone is entitled to their opinion and I'm sure others have their favorite era.

    Insights and incites by Notes
    Bob "Notes" Norton
    Owner, Norton Music http://www.nortonmusic.com
    Style and Fake disks for Band-in-a-Box
    The Sophisticats http://www.s-cats.com >^. .^< >^. .^<

    Comment


    • #3
      Absolutely the peak of rock music. 1965 to 1975 was the decade of the greatest rock ever made.
      Best deals on recording
      Gismo Studios: link
      My original music on ReverbNation: link
      Gismo Studios on ReverbNation: link
      Islam is a much greater threat to the free world than Communism ever was. - Easy Listener

      Comment


      • #4
        Creatively, this seemed to be a peak for a number of different musical genres, and also, not only in the West.
        Ken Lee on 500px / Ken's Photo Store / Ken Lee Photography Facebook Website / Blueberry Buddha Studios / Ajanta Palace Houseboat - Kashmir / Hotel Green View - Kashmir / Eleven Shadows website / Ken Lee Photography Blog / Akai 12-track tape transfers / MY NEW ALBUM! The Mercury Seven

        Comment


        • #5
          I think the period will be remembered as truly the genesis of fusion. Cross over of probably every genre. Jazz-rock-classical-indian blended in ways never before heard in the main stream before, as just one example.
          Last edited by electrow; 08-13-2016, 10:52 AM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by electrow View Post
            I think the period will be remembered as truly the genesis of fusion. Cross over of probably every genre. Jazz-rock-classical-indian blended in ways never before heard in the main stream before, as just one example.
            Indeed. I think it's fair to say that the majority of the record-buying public (here in the UK, at least) hadn't come across the 'dulcet tones' of a sitar before hearing Norwegian Wood

            Comment


            • #7
              That's exactly what I'm getting at. The crossovers, mixing, and matching.

              And this sort of thing was occurring in various genres, including world/international music, jazz, experimental, West African, Asian, etc., incorporating many different elements from what was then typically outside their genre. It seemed to be a time for incorporating lots of things in.

              It was also a time in which artists began stretching the boundaries of what was "normal" in pop music, whether it was thematic, lyrical, or instrumental passages.

              By just about any measure, this seems to be the most creative period in music.

              I don't know so much about fine art and such that I feel comfortable commenting on it, but my guess is that, as this was a largely cultural shift, at least in the West, this explosion in creativity was reflected in fine art (painting, sculpture, etc.) as well.
              Ken Lee on 500px / Ken's Photo Store / Ken Lee Photography Facebook Website / Blueberry Buddha Studios / Ajanta Palace Houseboat - Kashmir / Hotel Green View - Kashmir / Eleven Shadows website / Ken Lee Photography Blog / Akai 12-track tape transfers / MY NEW ALBUM! The Mercury Seven

              Comment


              • #8
                And of course electronic technology was beginning to be incorporated into popular music which had never happened before. Hearing a Moog for the first time "truly" was amazing. It was such a diverse musical period which expanded my musical tastes in so many directions.
                Last edited by electrow; 08-13-2016, 12:28 PM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Good point, that too. Synths were pretty big.

                  Technology kicked the creativity along quite well. Also, advancements in multi-track recording, using the recording studio as a musical instrument, tape loops, musique concréte, and on and on.
                  Ken Lee on 500px / Ken's Photo Store / Ken Lee Photography Facebook Website / Blueberry Buddha Studios / Ajanta Palace Houseboat - Kashmir / Hotel Green View - Kashmir / Eleven Shadows website / Ken Lee Photography Blog / Akai 12-track tape transfers / MY NEW ALBUM! The Mercury Seven

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I also think that musicians had more control over the product than the 'suits' in the office.

                    We got things in the music that we musicians love, themes with variations of those themes, longer development of musical ideas, and a break with that 2.5 minute AM radio format.

                    FM was just coming into it's own, and it took a while before the big corporate money dominated it. This gave the musicians with longer songs a place for them to be heard.

                    And I wonder if the drugs of the day had anything to do with it. LSD and Pot as opposed to Cocaine or Ecstasy or whatever the youth is into now?

                    I suppose there may be many factors, and these may have been contributors.

                    Anyway, the Beach Boys broke ground with "Pet Sounds", which inspired the Beatles to do "Sgt. Pepper" and eventually top it with the "Abbey Road Medley", and hen before long everybody jumped on the album as art form instead of just a collection of disparate 3 minute tunes with the weak ones supporting the hits.

                    Albums like "Dark Side Of The Moon", "Thick As A Brick", "Somewhere I've Never Traveled", "Days Of Future Passed", "Tommy", "Abbey Road", "Machine Head", "A Night At The Opera", "Close To The Edge", "Zep III or IV", Fragile, "In The Court Of The Crimson King", "Aqualung", "Royal Scam", "Aja" and so man others never happened before in the Rock genre and haven't happened in Rock or any of its descendants since.

                    I was lucky to be of gigging age during all of that.

                    Perhaps if music hadn't reverted back to overly commercial songs with a one month get-tired-of-and-need-to-get-something-new disposable format, the record companies wouldn't have gotten into the trouble they are in today. Why buy something that you will be tired of and dispose next month?

                    Insights and incites by Notes
                    Bob "Notes" Norton
                    Owner, Norton Music http://www.nortonmusic.com
                    Style and Fake disks for Band-in-a-Box
                    The Sophisticats http://www.s-cats.com >^. .^< >^. .^<

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Notes_Norton View Post

                      And I wonder if the drugs of the day had anything to do with it. LSD and Pot as opposed to Cocaine or Ecstasy or whatever the youth is into now?

                      Insights and incites by Notes
                      I think back then Music itself was the drug of choice for many - other drugs being incidental. Spending hours listening - the music it self was part of the conversation with those I knew. I remember being invited to a friend's place to hear Jimi Hendrix for the first time, on a high-end sound system - the record was played over and over.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by electrow View Post

                        I think back then Music itself was the drug of choice for many - other drugs being incidental. Spending hours listening - the music it self was part of the conversation with those I knew. I remember being invited to a friend's place to hear Jimi Hendrix for the first time, on a high-end sound system - the record was played over and over.
                        True. A new album was a social event then. Everybody gathered up to listen to an artists new work, examining the cover art, listening to and then discussing every song. It was a social thing, and one I miss very much.
                        http://thebasement.createaforum.com/

                        Comment


                        • Notes_Norton
                          Notes_Norton commented
                          Editing a comment
                          And because most of us listened to the same bands, the music was an icon of a generation. Now that we have rock, alternative, hip-hop, dance, EDM, metal, and so many genres of youth music, we aren't all "on the same page" anymore.

                      • #13
                        Originally posted by AlamoJoe View Post
                        True. A new album was a social event then. Everybody gathered up to listen to an artists new work, examining the cover art, listening to and then discussing every song. It was a social thing, and one I miss very much.
                        The whole social aspect of music has taken some serious hits over the past few decades. Musicians don't play together as often as they used to, and many people record alone now too, where it used to almost require multiple musicians - Les Paul and Mary Ford aside, you certainly couldn't do extensive multitracked albums by yourself in the earlier days. Plus today there's the whole proliferation of the personal playback device - which is largely a solo listening experience. It's much harder and less common to "share" the listening experience as you described Joe.
                        **********

                        "Look at it this way: think of how stupid the average person is, and then realize half of 'em are stupider than that."

                        - George Carlin

                        "It shouldn't be expected that people are necessarily doing what they appear to be doing on records."

                        - Sir George Martin, All You Need Is Ears

                        "The music business will be revitalized by musicians, not the labels or Live Nation. When the musicians decide to put music first, instead of money, the public will flock to the fruits and the scene will be healthy again."

                        - Bob Lefsetz, The Lefsetz Letter

                        Comment


                        • AlamoJoe
                          AlamoJoe commented
                          Editing a comment
                          It certainly is Phil. And I think it's tragic really. I fear it will go the way of so many things that used to bring us closer to each other.

                        • Notes_Norton
                          Notes_Norton commented
                          Editing a comment
                          Music played live along with the singer has an organic feel. Not only are the musicians (singer included as musician) reacting to each other, they are musically breathing with each other.

                          I used to be a first call sax at a local music studio (before the owner had a stroke and closed it). I'd add sax to a rhythm track, sometimes with reference vocals, sometimes with none. It isn't the same thing.

                          One example. The vocalist might intentionally hit a note flat and scoop up to pitch. If I were playing the counter-melody, and if it was appropriate, I would hit the answer part flat and scoop up to pitch. Many other subtleties in pitch, timing, and dynamics are also included.

                          And while I'm on the subject of dynamics. Many modern recordings are so over-compressed the dynamics of the instruments are so diminished that it sucks the life out of the recording.

                          When I started recording, the only compression was what a vacuum tube does, you had to use mic control and the engineer had to be more volume astute. But millions of great recordings were made that way. Since the AM volume wars arrived, way too many recordings are way too compressed.

                          Dynamics are important. Pretend you are scolding a child and you make every syllable and every word about the same volume and see what happens to the expression.

                          Me? I prefer to record with the entire ensemble at the same time, and I prefer to do it at night because I think it works better then. That's how Sinatra did it when he was at his peak. So if you need a few takes, do it. But if everyone is properly prepared before the session, chances are one or two takes is all you will need.

                          And you don't need to take 20 takes of the vocals, snip a few words from take 2 a couple from take 14 followed by a short phrase from take 9 and so on. And if you need auto-tune - get a real singer.

                          End of rant ( for now)

                          Insights and incites by Notes

                      • #14
                        I used to be a first call sax at a local music studio (before the owner had a stroke and closed it). I'd add sax to a rhythm track, sometimes with reference vocals, sometimes with none. It isn't the same thing.

                        One example. The vocalist might intentionally hit a note flat and scoop up to pitch. If I were playing the counter-melody, and if it was appropriate, I would hit the answer part flat and scoop up to pitch. Many other subtleties in pitch, timing, and dynamics are also included.
                        That brings up an interesting question ... does one track the rhythm section and then overdub the vocals first, or the lead instruments? Some vocalists want to have everything there (including solos) and the track as finished and polished sounding as possible since they feel it's inspiring... while having the vocals there is obviously beneficial for the soloists and lead instruments - they tend to like to follow the vocalist, or at least know where the holes are that the signer left that they can fill...
                        **********

                        "Look at it this way: think of how stupid the average person is, and then realize half of 'em are stupider than that."

                        - George Carlin

                        "It shouldn't be expected that people are necessarily doing what they appear to be doing on records."

                        - Sir George Martin, All You Need Is Ears

                        "The music business will be revitalized by musicians, not the labels or Live Nation. When the musicians decide to put music first, instead of money, the public will flock to the fruits and the scene will be healthy again."

                        - Bob Lefsetz, The Lefsetz Letter

                        Comment


                        • #15
                          Well first, while I agree that it was an unusually creative time on many levels, don't forget that was also an era that continued the disposable pop music ethos that was so prevalent in the late 50s/early 60s. What endures through time is the cream of the crop...I'm sure there were a lot of Bach wannabes who did okay at the time, but are forgotten today. Regardless, though, when I looked at the top 100 for 1966, it was a formidable collection of music and almost all of it holds up today.

                          Originally posted by Phil O'Keefe View Post
                          That brings up an interesting question ... does one track the rhythm section and then overdub the vocals first, or the lead instruments? Some vocalists want to have everything there (including solos) and the track as finished and polished sounding as possible since they feel it's inspiring... while having the vocals there is obviously beneficial for the soloists and lead instruments - they tend to like to follow the vocalist, or at least know where the holes are that the signer left that they can fill...
                          I kinda think this deserves its own thread, so I'll start one.
                          N E W S O N G ! To Say 'No' Would Be a Crime (Remix) is now streamable from my YouTube channel.

                          Subscribe, like, and share the links!

                          Comment













                          Working...
                          X