MetaChat - Lost in Translation.

Sweet probably got the most radio play (in terms of number of hit songs) of that group. When I was in college we used to stay up all night and then bug XL102 to play Ballroom Blitz.

posted by JanetLand 24 September | 08:29

When I say radio play I of course mean commercial radio.

posted by JanetLand 24 September | 08:38

(In related sad news that I missed, Girlschool guitarist Kelley Johnson passed away of spinal cancer in July. RIP, axeslingin' babe.)

posted by jonmc 24 September | 08:45

I would have thought relatively speaking, Motorhead were about as big in the US as over here.

Status Quo and Slade: don't think Americans really get pub rock. They prefer things to be either very slick and professional, or to beat you over the head with irony and messages (e.g. Dead Kennedys, Nirvana). They don't really see the point in just enthusiastically belting out barely-in-tune 3-chord rock.

posted by TheophileEscargot 24 September | 08:47

They prefer things to be either very slick and professional, or to beat you over the head with irony and messages (e.g. Dead Kennedys, Nirvana). They don't really see the point in just enthusiastically belting out barely-in-tune 3-chord rock.

Actually at the time Quo were doing 'Paper Plane' and 'Down Down', America was big into Mountain, Humble Pie, Skynyrd, Foghat and other boogie-rock that Quo would've sounded right at home next to Quo.

(and we Americans invented 3-chord rock)

posted by jonmc 24 September | 08:51

Slade was covered a lot. I heard Motorhead on the radio back in the day. Thin Lizzy did pretty well, as I recall:

"The Boys Are Back in Town" (1976) US: 8 UK: 12

You forgot Marillion :-)

posted by chuckdarwin 24 September | 08:51

They don't really see the point in just enthusiastically belting out barely-in-tune 3-chord rock.

That's the funniest thing ever. Pub rock is hard to sum up, but I know it when I hear it.

posted by chuckdarwin 24 September | 08:52

Oops:

UK: 8 US: 12

posted by chuckdarwin 24 September | 08:53

What about T. Rex? I always had the impression that they were more famous in England than here, despite their couple of familiar hits.

posted by Miko 24 September | 08:55

Slade was covered a lot. I heard Motorhead on the radio back in the day. Thin Lizzy did pretty well, as I recall:

Lizzy had one hit album and one hit single in the States. Slade were off the American radar until Quiet Riot covered 'Cum On Feel The Noize' and Motorhead are still a cult act in the US. But all the bands I linked to were superstar big in the UK and Europe. And it's odd because all of these bands were very good and not terribly exotic.

(also, I think were getting our terms mixed up here. I was under the impression that 'pub rock' was stuff like Nick Lowe, Dave Edmunds and Graham Parker. The Quo sound like Chuck Berry based boogie a la Humble Pie & Foghat. The three chord tradition in America began with what's called 'garage rock,' a great introduction to which is the box set I linked above)

posted by jonmc 24 September | 08:59

Also, Girlschool is one of those baffling non-success stories. Four hot tough-chicks playing catchy as hell punk/metal tunes. They should've been monsters.

posted by jonmc 24 September | 09:04

(and before somebody says 'what about the Runaways?' They were great and they brought the world Joan Jett & Lita Ford, but in the end they were a manufacturaed creation of Kim Fowley who's dream was to create Jailbait Rock. Girlschool were an actual band created by themselves.)

posted by jonmc 24 September | 09:08

Pub Rock - as in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pub_rock_(UK) is different thing to what most people mean when they say 'pub band' (a cover band that plays in pubs) or 'pub singer' (a person who sings in pubs, now most often to a karaoke accompaniment). I think he meant the latter.

posted by chuckdarwin 24 September | 09:10

The three chord tradition in America began with what's called 'garage rock,'

Can you be more specific? Because almost all traditional music is built around the 1, IV, V triad that makes up all of early country.

posted by Miko 24 September | 09:10

The Jam never really broke in North America either. Probably for the same reason that The Kinks weren't as big here as there...They were so very English.

posted by richat 24 September | 09:18

The three chord tradition in America began with what's called 'garage rock,'

I'm talking about mid-sixties stuff like the Kingsmen, the Count Five, the Cryan' Shames, the Vagrants and other bands included on the Nuggets collections, and who's legacy shows up in much of Bob Seger, the MC5, the Iron City Houserockers, the Bellrays, and a lot of the Jersey Shore sound. It was a response to Theophile's assertion that Americans don't 'get' basic bar-band rock, which is inaccurate on it's face.

And I heard the term 'pub rock' applied to Edmunds, Parker, Costello and Lowe before I heard it applied to anything else.

Probably for the same reason that The Kinks weren't as big here as there...They were so very English.

The Kinks did eventually break through in the US after 'Lola' they were bonafide stadium fillers. And aside from Saxon, none of the bands I linked seem particuarly British, any more than Zep or Floyd.

posted by jonmc 24 September | 09:22

Yeah, I think the Kinks were pretty damn big here, mainstream even.

posted by Miko 24 September | 09:23

Sorry, that is true...I think I was thinking of the "Dedicated Followers of Fashion" era Kinks more than the later stuff. And, I agree with you Jon, no one in the original list would seem to suffer from any overt Britishness.

posted by richat 24 September | 09:27

Waterloo Sunset is considered by many to be the greatest British single ever.

And I heard the term 'pub rock' applied to Edmunds, Parker, Costello and Lowe before I heard it applied to anything else.

It's the right term, I'm just saying that the way the NME used it at the time and the way the average punter uses it are quite different. 99% of people who say "pub rock" these days are ignorant of the term's original connotations... they simply use it to describe bad, amateurish music (like TheophileEscargot)

The first day I was here (to do a job interview), I met Elvis Costello. He was very gracious. I couldn't have been happier; it was as if I had been welcomed by the Queen herself.

/derail

posted by chuckdarwin 24 September | 09:30

The three chord tradition in American rock was around long before Louis Armstrong popularized it.

posted by Hugh Janus 24 September | 09:36

they simply use it to describe bad, amateurish music (like TheophileEscargot)

I don't think Theophile was saying it was bad per se merely misusing it to decribe what Americans would call 'garage rock' or 'bar-band rock.'

And this is rock and roll wwe're talking about here. Basic and amatuerish is good. See: the Ramones, the Who, the MC5, 'Louie Louie' 'Wooly Bully' etc. etc.

posted by jonmc 24 September | 09:39

Basic and amatuerish is good.

Now that is an eternal musical debate... we could go on about that for centuries (which is why I often say that only thing more subjective than food is music).

Your taste and mine are very different, but we've clearly established this fact. I like the Who with Moon, and would never have called that band amateurish (I really think they should hang it up now, though).

Now The Sex Pistols - there was an amateurish-sounding band. Can't stand them.

It is certainly possible to make very basic, direct, accessible music that isn't amateurish in any way. The Clash did it.

What I mean by amateurish is music that's out-of-tune (or worse, out-of-key or out-of-mode) *by accident* and annoyingly out-of-time *by accident*. If you don't even have basic control over your instrument, you should take some fucking lessons.

posted by chuckdarwin 24 September | 09:55

If you don't even have basic control over your instrument, you should take some fucking lessons.

Actually, most of the best rock players can't read a note and learned from playing along to records. It's when the lesson-takers decided that rock and roll needed 'improving' that things went wrong.

It is certainly possible to make very basic, direct, accessible music that isn't amateurish in any way. The Clash did it.

We're a garage band
We come from garageland

Sounds like Joe Strummer comes down on my side of the fence, dude.

posted by jonmc 24 September | 10:06

I heard the reason that UK bands don't make it in the States is because to break in the US you basically need a punishing touring schedule that stops you making any more decent music for the next year and a half, tires you out and leaves you wishing you were still playing pubs in West Bromwich.

The bands which were up for that gruelling schedule made it (Hello Smalltown, Minneapolis!!). The ones that didn't didn't. Simple as... I don't think it's got anything to do with talent or chord progressions or the sound.

Whether you like their music or not, Oasis are the perfect example of a popular UK band that just couldn't be arsed doing big US tours and who, as a consequence got punished for it.

posted by seanyboy 24 September | 10:08

Actually, most of the best rock players can't read a note and learned from playing along to records.

That doesn't mean they didn't take lessons and lie about it (like most actresses lie about their age). George Harrison's mother taught him.
Most guitar teachers don't teach people to read (sad, but true)... but that's a different matter.

Sounds like Joe Strummer comes down on my side of the fence, dude.

Maybe so, but they were a lot more adept at playing together in tune (more or less) and in time, which has made them the most enduring, influential punk band of all time.

I don't buy this tired old argument - the one that says that you have to be ignorant in order to be good. That's the way lazy people can rationalise being lazy. All knowledge is power. Just because I can read, doesn't mean I can't crank out three-chord anthems. It just means I'll do it a little better than someone who has no fucking clue what they're doing.

posted by chuckdarwin 24 September | 10:18

seanyboy, your point is well-made (and is probably true for most acts). Some things are just too damned British to ever make it in the states, though... and some artists just cannot make it, no matter how hard they tour.

Look at Robbie Williams. He LIVES IN LA and can't get arrested there. I think he's a hack, myself, but he is huge here.

posted by chuckdarwin 24 September | 10:21

I don't buy this tired old argument - the one that says that you have to be ignorant in order to be good.

That's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that when emphasis on technical virtuosity and high-minded artistic pretensions began to dominate rather than complement raw crude rock power is when something great was lost.

as a wise man put it:

June 1st, '67
something died and went to heaven
I wish Sgt. Pepper
never taught the band to play

posted by jonmc 24 September | 10:24

something great was lost

...and other things were gained. Swings and roundabouts. It's all blowback. As soon as one thing gets too big, something comes along to sweep it all away. Grunge killed hair metal... Romantic Music, typified by Beethoven, replaced Classical Music (typified by Hayden and Mozart) it's the same thing, it just took way longer before we invented recording.

Nothing sticks around for long in popular culture. Stuff like Yes, King Crimson and early Genesis (which is, I think, what you're on about) didn't really endure any more than the MC5 or The Kingsmen did.

We could be having this discussion in any pub or bar, and most people wouldn't know any of those bands. If we talked about Kayne West or Beyonce, they'd perk right up.

posted by chuckdarwin 24 September | 10:31

Stuff like Yes, King Crimson and early Genesis (which is, I think, what you're on about)

Yes is the type of stuff I'm on about (Genesis and Crimson had their moments of greatness actually). And I'd lump stuff like the Cure, the Smiths, Arcade Fire, Radiohead,et al in the same pile, just a different flavor.

didn't really endure any more than the MC5 or The Kingsmen did.

This is where you are 100% wrong. When the fads fade, hard basic rock always reurns (in some fashion) to fill the void. And I think it's safe to say that 'Louie Louie' and 'Kick Out The Jams' have aged far better than most art-rock.

We could be having this discussion in any pub or bar, and most people wouldn't know any of those bands. If we talked about Kayne West or Beyonce, they'd perk right up.

You're obviously hanging around the wrong bars. And I think it's safe to say that if you put 'Louie Louie' on in any bar in the world, most people would know it.

posted by jonmc 24 September | 10:40

Daniel Desario: I wrote out some Ramones songs.
Nick Andopolis: The Ramones? They only use like three chords.
Daniel Desario: So? I'll learn another one.

posted by gaspode 24 September | 11:31

This is where you are 100% wrong. When the fads fade, hard basic rock always reurns (in some fashion) to fill the void. And I think it's safe to say that 'Louie Louie' and 'Kick Out The Jams' have aged far better than most art-rock.

It's a bit of a roller coaster, is pop music. I think it's a bit like fashion. You know, the 80s clothes come back in and you get a bunch of disco ripoff shite.

Call me cynical.

posted by chuckdarwin 24 September | 13:02

Also Squeeze, The Housemartins/The Beautiful South, and XTC.

posted by kirkaracha 24 September | 13:06

I dunno. US bands have to tour the US, I imagine that it's only slightly less of a hassle for them.

It seems that the UK press is a lot more willing to throw it's weight behind a group with only an EP or a couple of singles under it's belt.

I think Oasis didn't get huge over here because they sound like a second-rate Beatles cover band. And the Gallagher's ego's are WAY out of proportion to their egos.

There's a lot of homegrown garage/power pop rockers that shoulda been huge, The Mats, Tommy Keene, Dwight Twilley, Josh Rouse, Matthew Sweet...

I think it's a wrong place, wrong time thing, myself.

posted by black8 24 September | 14:24

Couple of things to keep in mind:

1) Relative market size in the US vs. the UK. It takes proportionally fewer sales to make a hit there than it does here.

2) The relatively homogenous nature of the culture in Britain. Emphasis on "relatively", of course. (Although we now have a homogenous radio culture here, so that might mitigate things a bit. All the bands jon mentioned were 70s - early 80s, though, so that wouldn't have affected things as much.)

I think Oasis didn't get huge over here because they sound like a second-rate Beatles cover band. And the Gallagher's ego's are WAY out of proportion to their egos.

A-fuckin'-men to that, if we substitute "talent" for that last "egos".

posted by bmarkey 24 September | 19:10

There's a lot of homegrown garage/power pop rockers that shoulda been huge

The Connells.

posted by kirkaracha 24 September | 22:23

Re: virtuosity vs simplicty

Name some great Dream Theater songs (or Yes, or King Crimson, or whatever prog you prefer).

Now name some great Ramones songs.

Which list is longer?

QED.

There's nothing "wrong" with complicated music, and there's a joy in complexity that can be thrilling to hear. But the great rock songs are simple, catchy, and generally about girls, cars, and booze. Because rock is the bastard child of blues and country, two types of folk music that were more about conveying an emotion or a single sentiment than making sweeping musical statements.

Robert Johnson didn't need an orchestra to get his point across. The Carter Family didn't need a horn section.

In a hundred years, scholars will still be dissecting Dylan's lyrics. But parents everywhere will be singing "Proud Mary" to their kids. That's more important, I think.

posted by BitterOldPunk 24 September | 23:15

24 September 2007