[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: What the F is New Wave anyway??



>Ok, I did a marathon listen last night of the last 3 Who albums (WAY, FD, 
>IH).  Now, before I write my thoughts on this, I want to emphasize that 
>this is all subjective. This isn't meant to start a grand debate.  If it 
>does, fine.  But, I won't be broken hearted if the reply is simply "Hmmm, 
>interesting take" (I can already hear ML typing this ;-). I mean, it gets 
>into very fuzzy lines of what is RnR, and what is NewWave.  Are they 
>different?  What really *is* RnR? Is NewWave just RnR with a bit less 
>energy and anger of the mid-80's?  You tell me.

NewWave seems to be a very broad style.  Back in the eighties I was heavy 
into classical and jazz music, and so I picked up some NewWave albums as an 
extension of those genres.  I'm not much at fine style distinctions, but I 
thought Paul Winter, Ralph Towner and Kitaro all fit into the NewWave 
category.  Just lately I've noticed a couple or three other interesting 
artists that are pretty much unclassifiable, but seem to fit into that same 
tradition.  Is NewWave a group of artists who typically disregard genre 
distinctions and mix them all together?  Is this the same as NewAge?


>Now, listening to WAY, I hear the "transition" building.  Hell, he even 
>says so. I can't say I feel anything in this album really that could be 
>considered New Wave, but it definitely is leaving the RnR genre, or at 
>least starting to stretch it's boarders.  That is until the heaven shaking 
>last track.

There's actually a pretty sharp break on WAY--he's already made the change.  
I'd thought it was just that he was leaning toward jazz very heavily, but 
I'm thinking you've pegged it correctly.  Pete has such a feel for cultural 
movements, you can bet he felt it coming early on.  I thought The Who 
followed him extremely well on WAY.  This was a terrific new sound for them, 
very cutting edge and tightly done.  I think WAY is their second best album, 
after WHO'S NEXT, and pretty much timeless.  You'll never be able to fit 
that to a period.


>FD on the other hand definitely gives me ammunition, particularly "How Can 
>You Do It Alone", and "Daily Records".  But really so do "Don't Let Go the 
>Coat", and "Cache Cache". It's difficult to hear because of Rog's voice.  
>If you sit back and imagine a younger singer with a more distinct English 
>accent, it starts to change.

This one isn't so tightly done.  I mentioned already that the bass seems too 
prominent on some of these songs, as well as the fact that it was another 
huge change in direction.  Still, when you listen to the live tracks, they 
seemed to have worked it out after a little practice.  The album was just a 
little hasty--harder for them to do this than the material on WAY.


>Ironically enough, IH begins to turn back to the more "classic" RnR.  More 
>energetic, harder, more anger/emotion.

I think the style of Pete's material here sounds very much like WAY.  It's 
just not as well developed, and likely it's NewWave marred by those elements 
you've mentioned.


>For evidence of this, just look at the cover of IH, or check out any 1981 
>or 82 footage.  Pete is all about New Wave.  His dancing is classic New 
>Wave!

Terrific that he could shift into the jazz, isn't it?  Got it from his dad, 
you'd guess.


>Ok, the question begs to be asked......Who Came First??  Was it Pete
>following a new genre, or Pete creating a new genre???

Pete reflects culture--"channels" (as he says) the collective consciousness. 
  The way collective consciousness works is that elements form within a 
culture that can be picked up and synthesized into something new--ideas, 
opinions, technology, etc.   It's not unusual for scientists to make 
independent discoveries of the same thing without collaborating.  The same 
goes for musicians--the people who have a real feel for style know what the 
next movement is independently--without any collaboration.  I'd say Pete got 
to feeling really sick of disco and looked around for something different to 
do, synthesized a sound and style, and lo and behold, other artists came up 
with something similar.  That's what makes the beginning of a movement.


>But it all comes down to the *fact* that Pete was driving the band in a new 
>direction that you couldn't really classify as RnR.  While the rest of the 
>band were maintaining their "rock" status, albeit refined and mature, Pete 
>was diving into something different.

Do you mean in their solo albums?  I'll agree that John has stuck with RnR 
and even tends to roots rock.  In that time period, Roger was doing MCVICAR 
and PARTING SHOULD BE PAINLESS, though, which don't seem especially RnR.  
Since you mention it, I think they have a little touch of NewWave to them, 
too.


keets
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 
http://profiles.msn.com.