Paul Revere Dies of Cancer at 76

[Avid Listener]

Speaking of which, you're arguing about one word, while ignoring the overall issue. The difference between those two songs is obvious. If you don't understand, you're not listening.

I went into great detail describing the differences between the two songs. Clearly, you're the one not listening.

So this qualifies Paul Revere as a "pioneer"?

No, it qualifies the entire team of people who created and released records under the name "Paul Revere and the Raiders", collectively, as pioneers who advanced rock music from where it was to another place further along.

And to all, has anyone participating in this thread and commenting on the differences or similarities between "Kicks" and "Satisfaction" taken out their guitars and actually played both songs?

 

[TheBigA]

I went into great detail describing the differences between the two songs. Clearly, you're the one not listening.

[/I]

In all of your details, you never once mentioned anything having to do with lyrical content. Don't you listen to lyrics?

No, it qualifies the entire team of people who created and released records under the name "Paul Revere and the Raiders", collectively, as pioneers who advanced rock music from where it was to another place further along.

It's a very similar "team of people" who created and released records under the name "The Monkees." Are you telling me The Monkees are equally rock pioneers?

 

[TheFonz]

And to all, has anyone participating in this thread and commenting on the differences or similarities between "Kicks" and "Satisfaction" taken out their guitars and actually played both songs? [/I]

So a music historian would have to be a guitar player in order to determine what qualifies as "pioneering"?

 

[firepoint525]

I would say that if you must over-analyze it, at some point it ceases to be "rock 'n' roll." After all, wasn't it all supposed to be just fun and good times for us? After all, that is what we told our parents, right? Just good clean fun. Yeah, we may have known otherwise, but we never let on about it, now did we?

 

[Avid Listener]

In all of your details, you never once mentioned anything having to do with lyrical content. Don't you listen to lyrics?

Lyrics were irrelevant when discussing the fact that the production team that released songs under the name "Paul Revere and the Raiders" were musical pioneers. And, for the record, both Dick Dale and the Ventures were also pioneers. What does that tell you about lyrics?

It's a very similar "team of people" who created and released records under the name "The Monkees." Are you telling me The Monkees are equally rock pioneers?

No, because it's not the fact that it was a team that made Paul Revere and the Raiders pioneers, it was the music. The music of the Monkees didn't break new ground.

So a music historian would have to be a guitar player in order to determine what qualifies as "pioneering"?

No, but an internet discussion forum participant who is being obtuse should know something about guitar before making stupid statements about not being able to tell the difference between two songs.

 

[TheBigA]

Lyrics were irrelevant when discussing the fact that the production team that released songs under the name "Paul Revere and the Raiders" were musical pioneers.

No, because it's not the fact that it was a team that made Paul Revere and the Raiders pioneers, it was the music. The music of the Monkees didn't break new ground.

Read those two sentences. In the first one, you say "the production team" were pioneers. The second, you say it wasn't the team. Which is it?

I really don't understand how PRR music broke new ground. Instrumentally, everything had been done before. Even the double-tracked guitar solo in Just Like Me had been done 15 years earlier by Les Paul. I don't disagree with Dick Dale. He also did some double tracking, in the style of Les Paul. But I can't think of anything, instrumentally, lyrically, or even in terms of image that broke new ground. Once again, I don't want you to interpret what I'm saying as being negative. I like their music. It was well crafted pop. But there was nothing really new, and the fact that they're not in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame doesn't help their case. Not that it means anything. I can see they're in YOUR hall of fame, and that's good enough for you.

 

[TheFonz]

And, for the record, both Dick Dale and the Ventures were also pioneers. What does that tell you about lyrics?

I love the Ventures, but they certainly weren't "pioneers". What they did, for the most part, was cover instrumentally songs that other artists (including Dick Dale) had already done. Billy Vaughn and Al Caiola, along with others, were doing the same thing at the time. [/quote]

No, but an internet discussion forum participant who is being obtuse should know something about guitar before making stupid statements about not being able to tell the difference between two songs.

How dare you insult my weight.

 

[Avid Listener]

Read those two sentences. In the first one, you say "the production team" were pioneers. The second, you say it wasn't the team. Which is it?

I said that the team created pioneering music. It was pioneering because the music took multiple older musical ideas and synthesized them into something new. But the reason why it was pioneering was because of the music, not the fact that the music was created by a team. It would have been just as pioneering had it been created by one person working alone in a multi-track recording studio.

As for the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, that's a public relations bullshit factory. Madonna is in, the Moody Blues aren't. The RRHF is a joke.

I love the Ventures, but they certainly weren't "pioneers". What they did, for the most part, was cover instrumentally songs that other artists (including Dick Dale) had already done. Billy Vaughn and Al Caiola, along with others, were doing the same thing at the time.

The entire crews of the Nina, Pinta, and Santa Maria were all pioneers. One need not be the only one creating a new path to be a pioneer.

 

[TheBigA]

It was pioneering because the music took multiple older musical ideas and synthesized them into something new. But the reason why it was pioneering was because of the music, not the fact that the music was created by a team.

But you still haven't made the case for what was pioneering about it. Other than you like it.

Using your definition, everyone who makes music is a pioneer. Because all musicians synthesize the old into something new. Yanni is a pioneer.

 

[landtuna]

As for the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, that's a public relations bullshit factory. Madonna is in, the Moody Blues aren't. The RRHF is a joke.
/QUOTE]

THAT'S something we can all agree upon!

 

[TheFonz]

The entire crews of the Nina, Pinta, and Santa Maria were all pioneers. One need not be the only one creating a new path to be a pioneer.

Les Paul did "Lady Of Spain" in 1952. The Ventures did it in 1961. I don't hear a whole lot of "pioneer" in the Ventures' version.

 

[Avid Listener]

Les Paul did "Lady Of Spain" in 1952. The Ventures did it in 1961. I don't hear a whole lot of "pioneer" in the Ventures' version.

That's one song. For someone to be a musical "pioneer" doesn't mean each and every song must be new and groundbreaking. Expecting every single song an artist records to be groundbreaking in order the the artist's entire catalog of work to be considered "pioneering" is just a damn fool stupid thing to expect.

 

[Pat3]

I always loved how they had a keyboard behind the front grill of a Ford Mustang on stage, with working headlights. I saw them in concert several years ago at a state fair and noticed that the Mustang grill had been replaced with that of an old 50's era Edsel, which was a great inside joke about getting old. They would also do a bit where they would say "lets do a song for the old people" and then mime a song with the instruments and amps turned off.

 

[TheFonz]

That's one song. For someone to be a musical "pioneer" doesn't mean each and every song must be new and groundbreaking. Expecting every single song an artist records to be groundbreaking in order the the artist's entire catalog of work to be considered "pioneering" is just a damn fool stupid thing to expect.

Oh boy. Well, here's a few more:

Caravan The Esquire Boys 1952 Ventures 1960
Rawhide Link Wray 1959 Ventures 1961
Movin' & Groovin' Duane Eddy 1958 Ventures 1962
Moon Dawg The Gamblers 1960 Ventures 1962
Bulldog The Fireballs 1959 Ventures 1961

Just give me a holler if you need some more.

 

[Avid Listener]

Oh boy. Well, here's a few more:

Caravan The Esquire Boys 1952 Ventures 1960
Rawhide Link Wray 1959 Ventures 1961
Movin' & Groovin' Duane Eddy 1958 Ventures 1962
Moon Dawg The Gamblers 1960 Ventures 1962
Bulldog The Fireballs 1959 Ventures 1961

Just give me a holler if you need some more.

Not at all. Popularizing the music of artists who don't sell very well is a form of pioneering. Hell, that's pretty much what Led Zeppelin was all about at first, though Page liked to sign his own name to songs by the old blues masters.

However, the point you're ignoring is that you starting whining about lyrics, and I mentioned the Ventures as artists who recorded songs without any lyrics at all. Instead of continuing to discuss the issue of lyrics, you go off on a tangent about whether or not the Ventures are worthy enough in your eyes.

It seems you just like to argue for the sake of argument.

 

[TheBigA]

Not at all. Popularizing the music of artists who don't sell very well is a form of pioneering.

So The Monkees popularizing the music of Neil Diamond qualifies them as pioneers.

The irony is The Monkees had a hit with (I'm Not) You're Steppin' Stone, which was originally done by Paul Revere & The Raiders on their album "Midnight Ride." As I said, there are parallels between the two groups.

 

[Avid Listener]

So The Monkees popularizing the music of Neil Diamond qualifies them as pioneers.

The irony is The Monkees had a hit with (I'm Not) You're Steppin' Stone, which was originally done by Paul Revere & The Raiders on their album "Midnight Ride." As I said, there are parallels between the two groups.

Like I said, argument for the sake of argument.

 

[TheBigA]

Like I said, argument for the sake of argument.

If you explained your qualifications for "pioneer" better, we wouldn't be calling you on it.

You're the one who brought all this up in a thread I started.

Just because you're unable to explain yourself, you blame us.

 

[Avid Listener]

If you explained your qualifications for "pioneer" better, we wouldn't be calling you on it.

You're the one who brought all this up in a thread I started.

Just because you're unable to explain yourself, you blame us.

I don't cast pearls before swine.

 

[TheBigA]

I don't cast pearls before swine.

Sure you do...that's the whole idea behind labeling someone a pioneer.