Page 2 of 4
Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2006 2:48 am
by sowhat
Oh well... a twist of fate - you could've been visiting this section more frequently, Peter... i sort of can smell another confluence - well, i might be wrong...

nice to see you here, BTW, and great observations, too.
However, i sort of agree with Roy: everything is "relative", and one wouldn't think he's livin' a hard life until somebody else tells him/her about it... (oh yeah... talkin' about inside restrooms...)
Back to teen idols... well, i should've been more precise. I mean in many cases girls forget
some of their teen idols - those who have little inside their handsome "shell". The other point is that they can forget them for some time - well, they get married, have kids and have to take care of them, so naturally, they may have little time for hobbies. But kids grow and become more independent... and so their moms have more spare time and may go to concerts of their teenage idols to feel the magic once again... Sometimes tastes for music also change with age...
Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2006 5:42 am
by mgauction
Sheena & Roy - Thanks for your examples of powerful lyric writing: Morrison. Simon, Dylan etc. Those are excellent examples! Those days are gone here. You do something like that here now and you get an audit, wire taping etc. Hell, they are even trying to pass a law now where you cannot disagree with the current administration The Patriot Act???!! Fair & balanced - of course...
Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2006 11:23 am
by winston
I was born and raised in Southampton which is also a port city. I was there during the meteoric rise of the Beatles. Like the the Beatles, I had been exposed to music from the "States" as a result of members of our family who were in the merchant navy and who often travelled to and from New York.
The music they brought back was not available in record shops where I lived. My first exposure to blues artists came as a direct result of their purchases. I do agree that record shops did finally begin to get access to American music after a while. Many of the shop owners that I knew were avid readers (as was I) of he New Musical Express. NME was a newspaper that only featured pop stars and hip artists. It provided reviews on American music to some degree. Articles on American music was of special interest to me and others who were looking for something "different".
Despite what others such as Chris Curtis may recollect, I believe, that living in a port city, especially early on, had it's advantages. I believe the influx of American music through those ports by what ever means or reason, influenced the emerging sound of the Beatles and many other groups all across England.
Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2006 11:32 am
by brammy
Brain... interesting... did you ever see the Beatles in the early (pre-America) days?
Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2006 11:40 am
by winston
Kent,
I only ever got to see them on the television. That was a fairly frequent occurrence back then. They did play (at the Odeon I believe) in Southampton but unfortunately I did not get to see them live.
Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2006 11:47 am
by sowhat
...i wonder, however: how many popular acts emerged from Liverpool in the later period of music history (i.e. 70s till now)?
(yes i know it's a bit of an offtopic for this section... but i'd really like to know...)
Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2006 1:36 pm
by rob_mac
No one yet has mentioned the catalyst to all these bands forming, which I believe was the skiffle craze which started with the release of Lonnie Donegans 'Rock Island Line' in 1955. Thousands of skiffle groups were formed after this and many of the players went on to form the nucleus of the majority of the British Invasion Bands.
Another point is that although the Beatles were the ones to open the door of the Invasion, only a percentage of the ones that followed were from Liverpool. Hollies, Kinks, Rolling Stones, Hermans Hermits, Dave Clark Five etc were all from other parts of the U.K
From Rob
Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2006 3:48 pm
by britye
Beatles Gear Chapt.7, page 104 is a quote from an advertisement place in US Music Press by Tom Jennings, Boss of UK Company Vox, Early 1964 it is as follows, " You are about to be 'invaded' by a series of British performing groups who feature Vox equipment...could it be where the term British Invasion started?
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 2:14 am
by royclough
Many groups cite Lonnie Donegan as an influence though I am not sure how much musically but in terms of instrumentation. I still feel the emergence of The Shadows in the beatgroup format that was to become familiar, i.e Three guitars and drums was also a major influence
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 5:30 am
by j_gary
Peter, my own rather simplistic view is that the one of the primary reasons for the English invasion was due to the skill and style of the recording engineers, particularly George Martin. Contrast the sound and feel of the early Beatle recordings to what was else was out at the time and I think the difference is dramatic. Aside from talent, the presentation was invigorating.
I would submit that those early recordings sounded so good compared to other material, even on AM radio, that they assisted with the success of the music. You couldn't help but tap your feet and sing along.I think the recordings still hold up on modern FM radio as well.
It took a couple years for the industry to catch up. Until they did the Merseybeat dominated.
I happened to catch the Beatles live in Toronto a hundred years ago. After the noise of the crowd and the utter chaos that ensued once they took the stage, and add the unbelievably sparse stage gear, their music was almost invisible. The richness of their recordings allows one to experience the magic so to speak.
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 2:00 pm
by mgauction
No question, J. Gary! I saw them too at Dodger Stadium in 1965 and basically you just stood there for an hour and looked at them - thats all. Nothing could be heard or much of a song that could be recognized. Occasionally you could hear a guitar twang or a cymbal or high hat. Funny -- some of that sparse stage gear was from the opening acts.
Posted: Sat Mar 04, 2006 10:42 am
by chingnchime
Okay, here's a question referring to this thread's title.
EXACTLY WHAT DOES 'WATERSHED' MEAN, AND WHAT'S IT'S ORIGIN? Many of us have used the term, but I'd be surprised if anyone really knows the origin .
Posted: Sat Mar 04, 2006 11:47 am
by sowhat
Personally, i cannot answer your question, Steve (quite naturally...

), but i'd like to know the answer...
Posted: Sat Mar 04, 2006 11:49 am
by brammy
In 1739 Wooster Mass, a man named Linus McGinty would keep interconnected barrels of water in a shed located on a small cliff adjacent to his pig farm. It was an early form of water tower and (the ancient Romans not withstanding), McGinty was well known for having one of the first ones in the northern British colonies.
Some said it was rotting timber, while other swore that it was the deliberate malicious action of McGinty's prized pig Sally, but one day the entire shed holding the barrels gave way and came tumbling down the cliff killing not only McGinty but also his two adoped daughters who were slopping the livestock at the time.
Many lessons were learned by the community that day, not the least of which was to always keep your daughters away from filthy pigs. At any rate, this was the first so-called 'watershed event' and the term has been in use ever since.
Posted: Sun Mar 05, 2006 3:35 pm
by harley
I think you can still find good lyrics by modern American song-writers, as well as song-writers from anywhere else. Complacency can dull the pen, but complacency never lasts. Sooner or later, someone in control (parents, teachers, it doesn't have to be government) pushes a little too far and the kids who don't take ritalin find a way to combine three chords with the truth. Next thing you know, it's a golden age for lyricists.
What happens with looking back at our own golden ages, much like the people who look back at their teenage idols, is that the times surrounding the event color the event. There have been other bands that have written and recorded songs as good as the Beatles or the Stones, but they can't capture the "time" when we first grew to love them. I love Twist And Shout, but if someone came out with it today, it wouldn't capture my imagination as much as the Beatles version because there'd be no "rattle your jewelry" smart-aleck quality to it. That's part and parcel of what I bring to the listening experience. So, can there be another British Invasion that is remarkable similar to the early to mid 1960's - probably not. The times have changed. The next "invasion", even if it came from the same locations, would have a different character and feel to it.
But that's the way it should be. We ought to embrace the best of the new music that comes along. It'll be interesting to see what comes of today's music and how it's viewed 20 years from now. I'd hate to speculate on which bands will be remembered, but I certainly have a few that I'm pulling for.
I remember David Letterman interviewing Tom Petty about a release several years ago and he said, "some people are saying the Rock and Roll is dead. Do you agree with that?". Tom's reply was "I don't know, but it's still alive at my house."
It's still alive at my house, too.