1. Please take 30 seconds to register your free account to remove most ads, post topics, make friends, earn reward points at our store, and more!  
    TalkBass.com has been uniting the low end since 1998.  Join us! :)

Whats the problem with punk?

Discussion in 'Miscellaneous [BG]' started by russ_4ft, Feb 16, 2002.

  1. I cant seem to work out what some of you think about punk. Reading a thread currently being discussed on the boards it seems that there are a lot of people who are very stereotypical here.
    People are basically saying stuff like you dont have to be good at an instrument to play punk or punk is just noise or musical knowlede is nothing in punk etc.
    I class punk as a difficult type of music to play and i think that you do need to know about both your instrument and about the music your playing.
    I think the reason that many of you say this is because of your lack of knowledge towards punk.
    Check out 'no use for a name' and 'Goldfinger' and then tell me that what you said before is true.
    Their harmonies are amazing, the bass playing is very good and he sometimes plays the melodie line to the song, he explores the bassline well.
    Punk has evolved as well and even if the old school punks dont agree with it, it's still happening.

    - Russ
  2. The biggest problem is that 'punk' has become just another product to be marketed by major label record companies. There are still plenty of real DIY Punk bands out there, but the market is so saturated with 'punk' bands and labels (note the use of apostrophes to differentiate punk from 'punk') who have ripped off their sound and dress the part, the good ones get lost in the shuffle, or get labeled as a 'sell-out' when they get signed by a large label (even if they were good enough to deserve the attention). Really, the rip-off started in the late '70's with 'new wave', but now, what used to be called 'new wave', and later 'alternative', is full blown mainstream. 'Punk' bands sell millions of albums, and 'alternative' radio stations are top-5 in their radio markets.

    I think we need an alternative to 'alternative'. It's just not Punk to be 'punk' anymore.
  3. Maybe it's the fact that punk appears to be the antithesis of jazz and there are quite a few jazz bassers here.

    I (for one) guess that they know much MUCH more than I do so I don't really contest their opinions, even though it leaves me with an eerie feeling.

    In the end punk rock fills the musical and expressional needs of some of us. So what if you have three chords and a two-note bassline? Of course some find it boring (more than understandable especially if they want to explore the outer limits of music); others just love the simplicity and energy that punk provides.

    Could you be a serious musician and do punk? Heh! Ever heard "Outlandos D'Amour" by The Police??? "Next To You" and "Peanuts" were not punk but VERY punk-influenced... so hey...
  4. Dan I'm not so sure new wave, whatever it was, really ripped off punk. It was more a natural progression, but again new wave fell prey to recording companies the same way punk did!
  5. Brendan

    Brendan Supporting Member

    Jun 18, 2000
    Austin, TX

    You got some good acts out there, like Sucidal Tendancies, Bad Religion and Rancid for which the Punkers stand up, and then guys like Blink 182 and Sum 41 who are called "punk", which really ruins it for the majority of those that adhere to the "real"* punk.

    * we still haven't figured out what it punk yet, hence astrisk.

    Oh, and for the record, I'm not fond punk, but, due to a forced stint in a punk band for about 5 months, a good grasp of it was given me...
  6. old_skool


    Aug 17, 2000
    Milwaukee, WI
    The best reply that I could possibly think of for that statement is simply...:rolleyes:
  7. I agree with you about the 'punk' and punk but because it's true, bet there is a 'natural progression' in punk i think and i'm not talking about blink 182 and sum 41.
    Im talking about bands like h20, no use for a name, rancid, pulley, sick of it all, consumed, nofx.
    Look at all styles of music and there is a natural progression as well as a progression into pop.
    Funk these days is is classed as pop music ie kylie minogue and jamiroquai, but there are some ace funk bands out there that are underground. Do you see what i'm saying or am i talking out my arse?
    I know what i'm trying to say but i'm not sure how to put it! ;)

    As i've said before i think that punk is difficult if it's played properly. People that play punk properly are the likes of matt freeman, matt riddle, RUSS CARLIN (thats me!) :D
    The quote you said about a two note bassline, i'm saying that maybe some bands do that and in old school punk it was frequent, but i see that as another area that has evolved.
    I agree that punk is so much different from what it was in the 70's, but come on, it still exists! its just evolved. (just like every other type of music has evolved)

    - Russ
  8. Maybe my remarks were a little flippant and off the cuff. There has been evolution in punk, this is true. But the early punk ethos didn't require musicianship, it just required attitude. But if all punk bands played like Sid Vicious, punk would have died an early death. I, for one, am damn glad it didn't. Basically, I was trying to express my frustration with the bastardization of punk to turn a dollar.
  9. rickbass

    rickbass Supporting Member

    It was (late 70's) a movement, an attitude, a philosophy, reflected in the music.

    Now, it's a fashion, a style, an act.

    That's not necessarily bad. You don't have to have chopped cotton in Mississippi as a sharecropper to play the blues.
  10. JimK


    Dec 12, 1999

    ...from my readings-
    More than a few Jazz guys 'understand' why Punk is liked & even what it's supposed to be about(granted, these Jazz guys aren't the stereotypical types). ;)
    Here's what guitarist Joe Morris sez(from the book, New York Is Now: The New Wave Of Free Jazz)-
    "A lot of times, people want their music to be really intense, to fully engage them, because when they're really engaged, they have a second where they can contemplate their existence...So I've always understood that about kids into Punk. Of course, I'm the same age as the original Punk groups, and I already had something I thought was much more extreme than that(Punk), so I was like, 'I don't need that'. But I understood that what they were doing was trying to have an uncompromising musical experience.
    They didn't want it to be big & popular. They wanted to go to a little club, with a little group of aficionados, & just revel in the whole experience. They didn't want it(Punk) to be a corporate entity".

    A couple points Morris touched on(maybe the fans of "Jazz" here @TB feel this way; actually I think I do)-
    Punk may be 'extreme'...so, too is a lotta the stuff I was listening to back then(& now). Personally, I dug where Coltrane & Miles were coming from over Sonic Youth. That's me, though...
    Then there's the corporate angle; has the genre become 'watered down' for the masses? Has the music been 'compromised'?
    Really, I'm not qualified to answer.

    All in all, though, I try to be pretty much 'open-minded' about SOUNDS...if I detect BS, I will usually pass on it & seach elsewhere.
    BTW, this book also sez David S. Ware's 4-tet is a favourite amongst the Punk crowd. Ware is an intense SOB! ;)
  11. Oh, Old Skool...er...what I meant was that even if a song were so simple, that would not be reason enough to criticize it. If the simplicity has a REAL MEANING (as is with some punk rock) then we must respect that simplicity. If simplicity, however, was only meant as a way to get $$$, then it's just plain krap.

    JimK, it's good to know a jazz guy has respect for a genre that, "in the book", is not near that of his/hers. I just reacted to the fact that the thread starter here may be referring to some seemingly anti-punk comments posted on these boards before.

    Now as for the comment on the recording industry messing up punk... we can agree on this: Record Industry Inc. sure knows how to ruin music...they ruined punk, new wave, funk, rap, etc., etc. ... all in the name of $$$€€€!
  12. frankencow150

    frankencow150 Guest

    Oct 17, 2001
    I think im gonna get killed for saying this but....

    I think some punk songs have better music writing then alot of other types of music.

    Listen to Less Than Jake,they make such good melodic songs.They are a ska band,but alot of their new songs are punk with horns.They dont just play 3-chord songs(well maybe their guiatrist does sometimes).

    I think many others will agree with me that Roger is an awesome bassist.

    You all know about Matt Freeman.I really like Rancid,even though sometimes their songs sound kinda sloppy and unorganized.

    Punk does stoop to a lower level every time a new mtv 'punk' band comes out.But there will always be good underground punk.
  13. SoggyTrousers

    SoggyTrousers Guest

    Jan 9, 2002
    Wayne, New Jersey
    Well if you like 4 power chords, 4 8th notes on bass, and bass-snare on drums...punk is A-Okay. i just dont see how (i will assume most of us are educated, respectable, middle class bassists) bassists can appreciate such simple thoughtless basslines like Mark from blink's. it makes me want to puke.
  14. frankencow150

    frankencow150 Guest

    Oct 17, 2001
    Not many people like Mark's basslines,if you can even call them basslines.:p

    Also,not many people "consider" blink 182 "punk".
  15. old_skool


    Aug 17, 2000
    Milwaukee, WI
    Listen to Travis from Blink 182 and tell me that is just bass and snare...Its obviously not. I personally cant stand Blink but I don’t have my head up my arse when it comes to talented drummers. Just because one part of the band (or more in this case) is crap does not mean that there is not a talented diamond in the rough.
  16. What? I snooze the day away and this pops up? There have been a lot of these lately!
    It looks like everyone has been taking the words outta my mouth, so I really don't have anything to say... yet. :D

    Kudos to DanNoWhere and Brendon and Old_skool and Frankencow150.

    The only comment I'd like to address is rickbass1's...

    The only act are the ones you see on MTV. There is still very much a movement, an attitude, and a philosophy backed by REAL punk music. My town (Denver) has already had two punk rally concerts this year.

    There are a lot of alterna-pop-punk bands who have little to do with punk but tons to do with "The Arch-Nemesis" of Punk; CAPITALISM.

    Real punk bands are very independent and underground. There will probably always be a lot of confusion as to which is which as long as MTV continues to lable crappy alterna-rock bands "PUNK".


    You're a demanding consumer. And you demand instant gratification. Your needs are our main concern.
    Let's be honest. As consumers we all have needs and desires. Trouble is, we suppress them. Now in nature, as in the business world, there are winners and there are losers. But does the predator pity the prey? I don't think so. It's not just unnatural, it's plain unhealthy. Nurture your desires. Cultivate your desires. Let them grow and flower into the blossom that is GREED.

    You see, you are needed! Your greed provides this country with the fertile financial soil in which the roots of exploitation can spread, the limbs grow and flourish. This in turn furnishes you, the consumer, the standard of living you've come to expect. The products you buy, the programs you watch, the car you drive, you as an individual. Without them, you have no identity, no purpose, no reason to exist.

    Greed. Hatred. They're not just good ideas, they're the precepts theis country was founded on. They're what keep you right where you are.

    And we'd like to keep it that way.;)

  17. rickbass

    rickbass Supporting Member

    I hope you're right Ad, that there really is somebody out there keeping it real. But the scene has changed drastically. And I don't mean the "corporate" posers like Green Day and Blink.

    The crucial factor that changed it is - punk became profitable~

    This is reflected in so many of these "punk" bands that try to hard to be "punk" - this joker in the supposedly punk, MXPX, has letters on his guitar that spell "punk", NOFX has so many song titles that are simply profanity and body funtion references, Pennywise looks like they just came from Abercrombie & Fitch, for instance.

    Being part of the original punk scene, I have a hard time getting past the "authenticity" of "punk bands" with their own websites and photo galleries and looking like my older brother does or as though they have to work at the bank the day after the show or see how they're doing in the class president election.

    Not that I don't like a lot of their music.

    It's just that it's like "punks" are trying so hard to be "punk." When you're that self-conscious about being "one", odds are - you ain't . Look at how many threads appear on TB asking, "What's the best punk bass?" "Can you play punk and use a 5-string?," "Can you use a fretless for punk?", "Which pickups give the best punk tone?". Something smells phony :rolleyes:

    I hope you're right - someone is still doing it because they have to.
  18. Jarrod


    Jan 1, 2002
    Los Angeles, CA
    i agree with everything you said except for this, and i demand an explanation! ;)

    i've seen pennywise live several times and they usually just wear plain tshirts and pants, nothing trendy... how is that abercrombie wannabe?

    i'd say pennywise is one of the more credible well-known punk acts out there right now
  19. Arrgh! Another one of these threads.
    The thing I dont get... people who are into punk always complain about people not liking punk! That makes no sense, the whole idea of punk is that it is underground, and is kind of a protest against mainstream music, so obviously any REAL punk will only be liked by few people. I would have thought that the less mainstream listeners that liked it the better?!!
    About punk's stereotype of bad musicianship, it is pretty well deserved. Not fairly maybe, there is probably alot of very talented punk musicians, but still it is obvious as to why punk has the stereotype it does.
    For one, look at the most famous and one of the original punk bands - The Sex Pistols. Their bassist (Sid Vicious) had NEVER touched any instrument, let alone a bass guitar, before he joined the band, which kind of shows how important the music was to the band. Then there were stories that the band was so bad that they got other musicians to record on their album. I am sure that that has really helped people form a stereotype about punk.
    Another reason is that, yes their might be some very talented punks, the ones that get all the attention and the ones that us non-punks are exposed to do suck, (ie Blink).
    Another reason is that punk was never originally about MUSIC, it was about protest, or a movement, or an attitude. The music was secondary.
  20. frankencow150

    frankencow150 Guest

    Oct 17, 2001

    I'm speechless.

Share This Page