The Clash vs. The Ramones

[Orangey]

The clash are better musicians but I voted Ramones because I like to listen to them better.

 

[hommefatal]

I voted The Clash, like most others.

 

[Domino]

I vote for the Clash. They were very avant garde, had more tricks up their sleeves than your average "rattle and hum" punk band.

Big fan of the others too - the Pistols were meant as a finger in the eye of authority, the Pogues were classic Irish "bite me" satire, and the Ramones were possibly the most enjoyable sound wise because not everything was a nasty rant.

 

[matmos]

The Clash, only just though.

On the plus side. The last time I decorated the house I had the Ramones & the Buzzcocks playing on the stereo on a loop. 3 rooms, 2 coats - a day and a bit.

Thanks, Joey. RIP.

 

[Domino]

It may be a generational thing, but I was never able to fully click with neo/GenY-punk, like Green Day or the Living End. I *like* them for what they are, but it's just not the same.

John Lydon is right I think - punk, as it was in its short-burst original form, is dead and has been dead for some time.

 

[matmos]

Agreed. They are successors to a throne that never quite was - punk died before it was born.

Godspeed you! black emperor are closer by far to the original idea than, say, Green Day.

Johnny's okay, but here in the UK he advertises butter. Iggy's even worse - he's doing car insurance.

 

[ajblaise]

Godspeed you! black emperor are closer by far to the original idea than, say, Green Day.

Definitely. Pop-punk should have never came to be a genre. Maybe a novelty album or two could have been dedicated to it.

 

[matmos]

Agreed. A Pistols singalong - where they cover The Beach Boys and Boney-M numbers.

Now I think about it, The Great Rock 'n' Roll Swindle was a bit like that.

 

[Domino]

I'm a big fan of western swing and country punk, like Gene Vincent, Eddie Cochran, and the Burnettes.

 

[EffEmDoubleyou]

Agreed. They are successors to a throne that never quite was - punk died before it was born.

Godspeed you! black emperor are closer by far to the original idea than, say, Green Day.

Johnny's okay, but here in the UK he advertises butter. Iggy's even worse - he's doing car insurance.

Definitely. Pop-punk should have never came to be a genre. Maybe a novelty album or two could have been dedicated to it.

But isn't that just a judgment based on categorization and not on the music? Like, if I countered that Green Day was power pop, would you change your opinion on them? I enjoy them a lot, but never had any illusion that they were punk. I don't think they do, either. The sound may be approximately the same, but the approach is not at all.

 

[Domino]

But they call themselves punk, FM. Does that count for anything? Who else IYO would be "power pop", just for clarity?

I class Green Day as GenY-punk or neo punk.

To me, post punk is like Jesus and the Mary Chain or the Furs.

 

[ajblaise]

But isn't that just a judgment based on categorization and not on the music? Like, if I countered that Green Day was power pop, would you change your opinion on them? I enjoy them a lot, but never had any illusion that they were punk. I don't think they do, either. The sound may be approximately the same, but the approach is not at all.

I think pop punk would best describe bands line Green Day and Blink 182. Though some of the bands that were labeled as pop punk, which erred on the side of punk, were really good. The whole idea is kind of an oxymoron.

EDIT: LOL look what someone did to the Green Day entry on Wiki. Green Day - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

DOUBLE EDIT: Dammit. It changed already. The whole entry just said "Green Day is awful" and then it was blank.

 

[EffEmDoubleyou]

But they call themselves punk, FM. Does that count for anything? Who else IYO would be "power pop", just for clarity?

I class Green Day as GenY-punk or neo punk.

To me, post punk is like Jesus and the Mary Chain or the Furs.

Hmmm. I'm wary of using any of those terms. They're all vague and they overlap. Left to my own device, I'd just classify them as "awesome". I only used power pop as an example to demonstrate how categories affect opinions. Like, if I gave you a chocolate cookie and told you it was a brownie, you'd say "this is a terrible brownie, it's hard and crunchy!" But if I told you it was a cookie you'd likely say "this is delicious!" On its own merit, the cookie is delicious, but it all depends on what your expectations are.

What I was trying to get at is whether the other posters expected Green Day to be a brownie when they're a cookie, and whether that affected their opinion.

This is turning into an interesting discussion!

 

[Quinlan]

I've never really been bothered with knowing what genre different bands are from other than "like", "ok" and "dislike".

I say the Clash only because I never really got into the Ramones as I did the Clash.

 

[OrangeAppled]

I like both a lot, but I will go with the Clash here. Stronger song-writing overall, IMO. It's a close call for me though.

 

[LadyJaye]

Hmmm. I'm wary of using any of those terms. They're all vague and they overlap. Left to my own device, I'd just classify them as "awesome". I only used power pop as an example to demonstrate how categories affect opinions. Like, if I gave you a chocolate cookie and told you it was a brownie, you'd say "this is a terrible brownie, it's hard and crunchy!" But if I told you it was a cookie you'd likely say "this is delicious!" On its own merit, the cookie is delicious, but it all depends on what your expectations are.

What I was trying to get at is whether the other posters expected Green Day to be a brownie when they're a cookie, and whether that affected their opinion.

This is turning into an interesting discussion!

Yeah, I was just pondering that last night after watching a Green Day interview. People call them next wave punk, and I can grudgingly agree with that. Especially after watching their drummer french kiss a taxidermied monkey head.

When they first gained popularity, however, I refused to call them any such thing, because in my mind, punk was a one time thing. It was relevant in the moment it was created, but not a sustainable force in the form that it originally took. It was a thinking man's rebellion against classism, and neglect of the poor man. What punk band in a developed nation has anything to complain about?! I get why punk is a thriving thing in places like China, where their music is forced underground, and these people are in fear of their lives. THAT is something to fight back against. Not contrived ire over mini malls and your girlfriend's annoying parents.

 

[swordpath]

Good point Jaye, and I agree that the era that punk was birthed from would be the most raw and bare-boned display of the angst and social injustice the punk scene strives to encapsulate. However, there's still a lot of bands out there still kicking and still speaking out about political corruption, poverty, social class etc. etc. - an underground music scene that's more sincere and devoted (and I wouldn't put Green Day in this category, though I don't mind some of their songs ) than the watered down, emo stuff you hear on the radio or you see at hot topic today.

Verse, a melodic hardcore punk band from Rhode Island:

The New Fury
They’ve got themselves a new spin
on the story, twisted for one-sided glory. Devastation soon
becoming fuel for the masses new fury. A greedy hand in
the guise of a good man. So threatening. So deafening.
So silencing, that familiar stance. The burden now passed
to us, we lose our footing but still try to stand.
No control.
No more rules.
“Perpetual war for perpetual peace”, turn a
blind eye to poverty while manufacturing new enemies. The
new slave’s south of the border, murdered or overseas. We
still struggle with the fact that one percent has ninety-nine
on their knees. Washington’s drawing up war plans, while
there’s still no hope for the homeless man. No one should
have to live under these men, iron fists with gun in hand.
No more control.
No more rules.
They try to make you
and me live life by their design: No free thought. No free
speech. No peace of mind. They make a move to confine.
But they’ll never silence me as long as I can Breathe!

I've been drawn to music of this style since middle shool. Not because I can unquestionably stand behind all their stances/ideals on various subjects but because I've never witnessed another style of music that displays the same level of passion, conviction, anger.... Realness.

 

[MetalWounds]

I'd call this a punk song

[YOUTUBE="x_wLVCLPx0M"]Highway Patrol[/YOUTUBE]

 

[pure_mercury]

But they call themselves punk, FM. Does that count for anything? Who else IYO would be "power pop", just for clarity?

I class Green Day as GenY-punk or neo punk.

To me, post punk is like Jesus and the Mary Chain or the Furs.

Actually, Billie Joe Armstrong has declared in interviews "we're a pop-punk band."

 

[pure_mercury]

Definitely. Pop-punk should have never came to be a genre. Maybe a novelty album or two could have been dedicated to it.

This is rock Know-Nothingism at its most simplistic. Look at some of the great artists who fit the pop-punk bill: Green Day, Buzzcocks, The Undertones, Descendents/All, Stiff Little Fingers. Not to mention people who combines punk and pop with other genres like Elvis Costello, The Replacements, Nirvana, etc. There are several current acts who could fit that bill, as well (Foo Fighters, My Chemical Romance, Ash). Most pop-punk bands suck, but most bands in every genre suck.