errbt
PAPER GOD
"untalented guitarist"
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by errbt on Sept 20, 2015 13:41:07 GMT -5
I don't think many rock bands take their influences from funk and disco but I maybe wrong. I respect Nile but I wouldn't take his throwaway comment as fact. If you or even the band see themselves as rock (although I'd imagine even the thought would make Nick shudder with horror)then that's fine and I'm happy to be wrong. To me they are a great pop band, just like the Beatles were, which is nothing to be ashamed of. Umm...the quote is from RODGER, as in Taylor, not Nile Rodgers. Care to rephrase your response?
|
|
errbt
PAPER GOD
"untalented guitarist"
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by errbt on Sept 20, 2015 13:50:03 GMT -5
"Duran were a rock band, really...a rock band with synths"* Rodger, speaking of the classic era of the band, as captured on the uncut extra segments on the Classic Albums: Rio DVD. *I'm paraphrasing, as I don't have the DVD here right now to double check it, but I just watched it again a couple weeks ago and that's almost exactly how he worded it. agreed. Duran's music was hard to define, but a 'rock band with synths' is about right. the term New Romantic wasn't well enough defined for me, New Wave is how i think most people would describe them - but most New Wave bands didn't have rock guitar like DD did. as a person who listens to a lot of snyth pop, i honestly don't see where people are getting that. Pet Shop Boys and Erasure are synth pop, not DD. elements of synth pop? absolutely, but they've never been a synth pop band. Yep, I've seen Andy described as their "secret weapon" in the past, as it was his influence that kept the band from being a pure pop band like Culture Club or Spandau, two bands that the press erroneously compared Duran to, but in reality could not even come close to touching our boys' unique blend of disco, synth, & punk/rock edge. Maybe we should all just settle for the description of Duran as being completely unique, occupying a space that intersects rock, disco, punk, synth, & pop. Actually, "pop" isn't even really a genre...it simply means popular, and in the early to mid '80s in particular, the "pop" charts (the Billboard Hot 100 here in the US, at least), were filled with a staggering variety of different styles of music (which is why I always find it funny for poseurs to write off the '80s as "corporate" music that all sounded the same, or whatever BS they read in Rolling Stone). Anyway, by the definition of "pop" as popular, then yes, Duran Duran were a pop group in the '80s, but not for very much time since then, mainly in the early '90s.
|
|
|
Post by dejr26 on Sept 20, 2015 13:50:40 GMT -5
Oh apologies, I misunderstood. You meant Roger Taylor, not Nile Rodgers. Anyway, I'm not touchy about it but I just don't personally see them as a rock band, if it that means I'm wrong then that's fine and dandy. Just because a band has a guitarist, doesn't make them rock in my book.
|
|
errbt
PAPER GOD
"untalented guitarist"
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by errbt on Sept 20, 2015 13:53:06 GMT -5
Oh apologies, I misunderstood. Anyway, I'm not touchy about it but I just don't personally see them as a rock band, if it that means I'm wrong then that's fine and dandy. Just because a band has a guitarist, doesn't make them rock in my book. Nick probably agrees with you! Anyway, please see my response right before yours for a more elaborate explanation of my position. ps Sorry about my tone in my first response to you. Going to play my first hockey game of the season in a few hours and I think maybe I'm just subconsciously getting my abrasiveness up.
|
|
|
Post by tad on Sept 20, 2015 14:00:06 GMT -5
Oh apologies, I misunderstood. You meant Roger Taylor, not Nile Rodgers. Anyway, I'm not touchy about it but I just don't personally see them as a rock band, if it that means I'm wrong then that's fine and dandy. Just because a band has a guitarist, doesn't make them rock in my book. i think the spirit of the quote is to suggest the synth element changes the dynamic of the sound. if you were to take all the synths out of DD '81 and Rio, the sound would be very rock/funk. it's the tension generated between electronics and guitar that made the early sound so unique. combine that tension with the chemistry Roger and John have together, and you've got something very special and hard to define indeed.
|
|
|
Post by dejr26 on Sept 20, 2015 14:10:39 GMT -5
Agreed.Maybe it is hard to define as their styles cover many genres but that is sort of why I saw them as more pop, personally. An amalgamation of popular sounds with an eye on chart success and staying modern and relevant. That's not to say their music never had a rock edge to it but I just can't put them in same field of music as Led Zepelin or Status Quo.
Anyway, let's just say they are an amazing band with a unique style of their own .
|
|
|
Post by Medazzatrash on Sept 20, 2015 14:15:44 GMT -5
You know nothing about me or my education so if that's the best you can come up with, I'm really not impressed. 'Baby members' need to earn respect..you just keep digging and I'll keep relishing. Skin, you treat a lot of DD fans on this board harshly. There's a hostility to your posts as if you're attacking others on behalf of the band. I don't think the band would be happy with this kind of "defense". Earlier in this thread or in another thread you called someone a "cock". I really don't understand your need to say some of the things you say. I know as a member of this board I'd appreciate yours or anyone elses posts not resulting in that. We're all capable of constructive discussion. Lets focus on that.
|
|
th1972
I posted a little more
Posts: 23
|
Post by th1972 on Sept 20, 2015 14:35:51 GMT -5
You know nothing about me or my education so if that's the best you can come up with, I'm really not impressed. 'Baby members' need to earn respect..you just keep digging and I'll keep relishing. Sorry, constantly failing to accept that the opinions of others a) might differ from your own and b) are every bit as valid as your opinions = No respect. Not that I feel obliged to "earn respect" in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by Medazzatrash on Sept 20, 2015 14:59:19 GMT -5
Skin, you treat a lot of DD fans on this board harshly. There's a hostility to your posts as if you're attacking others on behalf of the band. I don't think the band would be happy with this kind of "defense". Earlier in this thread or in another thread you called someone a "cock". I really don't understand your need to say some of the things you say. I know as a member of this board I'd appreciate yours or anyone elses posts not resulting in that. We're all capable of constructive discussion. Lets focus on that. I'm really not getting into this again..quite frankly I have more pressing issues to deal with right now. However wishing for an album to fail (Aglewis) is not an opinion. There's no need for someone to wish that on our favourite band. I won't change so you can either accept it or carry on banging your drum.. Dude its not like the band NEEDS to succeed. The band has had failures before and it forced them to rethink things. All he's wanting is for it to fail and wake them up. He wants them to change musical directions. If its going to take one more album that doesn't spawn a Top 40 hit to get them back to making quality music again, I'm all for that. Bottom line, no need to take it all so seriously. Like you said, there's more important things in life.
|
|
|
Post by Medazzatrash on Sept 20, 2015 15:31:10 GMT -5
Dude its not like the band NEEDS to succeed. The band has had failures before and it forced them to rethink things. All he's wanting is for it to fail and wake them up. He wants them to change musical directions. If its going to take one more album that doesn't spawn a Top 40 hit to get them back to making quality music again, I'm all for that. Bottom line, no need to take it all so seriously. Like you said, there's more important things in life. Christ man, listen to yourself just for a moment..how many more albums do you really think they have left in the tank? One? Possibly two? The band don't have time for an album to to fail and supposedly learn from it! Lol. Whatever, the album is a success and this discussion is pointless. You have your ideas on how much Aglewis should be respected (laughable) and I have mine. That's it. With the greatest of respect, I couldn't care less what you think or anybody else thinks on what I say about anybody. All I ask is that people give opinions and stop the pointless, arrogant slating. I do take it seriously..guilty as charged your honour. It's an open forum and I'll have my say..take it or leave it 'dude'. You'll probably want to get the last word in so you go right ahead.. Honestly they probably have 3 - 5 more albums in them. They have said it themselves they have no desire to stop. I think of DD as the Rolling Stones of their generation. I suggest you have a little more faith. Be confident that the band is big enough to laugh in the face of failure and comeback stronger. Accept that they can learn from mistakes. Also, and this is important... know that your opinion is not law and that those with negative opinions on this album should be completely free to express their thoughts and feelings. I have never ONCE told you your opinion was wrong, called you names or attacked your character for being so POSITIVE on what I feel is a mediocre album. I've only ever called you out when you treat others with different opinions with disrespect.
|
|