A little thought experiment I’ve shared on twitter today.
https://twitter.com/seaninsound/status/1281863037096464384
I’d delete The Velvet Underground & Nico. How about you?
Because… it set such a bar for cool that complacent copyists borrowed too much from it, rather than inventing something new. For every great record it inspired there was a slew of style over substance (abusers).
Potential downside: would Ziggy Stardust have still existed?
Upside: Loutallica would have happened sooner.
Think I’d go with Up the Bracket. The Libertines were alright but not anywhere near interesting enough to justify the adulation they received.
And, although it’s not their fault, the trail of wannabee bands they inspired really saw a real stagnant/dull period for British guitar music.
Plus the whole worship of musicians with pretty serious drug problems partly because of those excesses seems like something that should have been left well in the past. No judgement from me regarding personal drug use but the way the media frothed over it just seemed ridiculous.
The Ziggy thing is interesting. I love both VU and Bowie, but until I saw the documentaries about Bowie hadn’t appreciated how much he was influenced by them.
Oasis - Definitely maybe.
Some decent tunes but the attitude of the band stunk (the past is better than the present, bigger is better) Unfortunately they were massively influential and - unlike the velvets - none of those they inspired were any good.
Was tempted to nominate the smiths debut for similar reasons (has there ever been a guitarist as influential but whose approach was as maddeningly misunderstood/ignored as Johnny Marr?) but they did inspire some great bands amongst the dross tbf.
Machina.
Wonder if The Las would be a better shout as it would wipe out all the worst elements of britpop.
Would save us from Cast at least.
Fuck I hadn’t even factored that in. Press the button now!
This was my argument in the VU HGATR. So much shitty music made in the name of them.
Yep. I will still defend that album. It was so of the moment, and felt like a genuine revolution at the time. But almost everything it inspired and associated with it is dogshit.
Aye, if I want jangle I’ll listen to the byrds, ta
Stone Roses s/t because two thirds of it are wank and it has a lot to answer for
Yeah this might be closer than the Las tbf
That’s kinda my point though, he didn’t just jangle. His style was a deceptively simple fusion of 50’s rock & roll, 60’s pop and psychedelia, folk, funk, glam rock, punk. He steeped himself in that stuff and stripped it down to what he thought was it’s most essential elements. His copyists just aped the most obvious characteristics of his sound with no idea what they were nicking.
Oh yeah I was agreeing with this! There’s far more depth, he constantly wove new styles into his playing.
sorry i misunderstood, thought you were knocking Marr too.
The U2 one we all bought
Honestly never heard any VU in Bowie, I think he liked them but his music never really drew from them. To me Ziggy is much more informed by 50s rock + Jacques Brel
Probably Arctic monkeys ST and replace it historically with Country on the Click because that’s the world I want to live in
Robson and Jerome. Seriously, they were Simon Cowell’s big break, made him his first million. No R&J means you have no X Factor. You eliminate a massive swathe of shit pop music from the last 20 years, you get to have proper Christmas number 1s and you still get to keep Girls Aloud, as Cowell had nothing to do with them.