usedtobebabson wrote:Trying to differentiate it from the Greenwich Village Sound, who's culture gave us Hair and The Velvet Underground. All I can come up with is the San Francisco Sound was a bit earlier.
Susan Butcher wrote:Do the lyrics count? Or should we consider only the style of the music? I wouldn't want to separate them. Just as an example, I'd say the slightly strange quality of Jefferson Airplane's early records is mostly in the words. With Great Society, it's in the music as well.
Hmm. Maybe a "slightly strange quality" is essential to it.
starfire II wrote:I think you've probably answered your own question regarding the lyrics, and I particularly agree with the first paragraph. I can think of only a handful of rock lyricists whose words are not reduced to utter rubbish outside the context of the song. I think music journalists place far too much emphasis on lyrics anyway, often looking for (or contriving) meanings that aren't there. Most of the time, songwriters are just looking for words that scan or rhyme, and quite often, there is no deeper meaning than that.
Mostly, I think journalists just focus on the lyrics because it's easier than trying to describe the music. Sorry to have moved away from the subject slightly, but this is a bit of a pet hate of mine.
Going back to the question, I just feel that the SF sound was arrived at through a confluence of things - music, drugs, people, environment and other factors - that just happened to fall together at the right time. Just fate, I guess.
oldblue wrote:fate may explain it's genesis but still what was it. i kind of believe it's all tied up in e=mc2
redrabid wrote:All your reactions seem to affirm that there was not a San Francisco Sound. A movement maybe, a feeling of community, but that is it.
Hair to me (and to others, among which almost all critics at the time) seemed a complete cashing in on the latest musical fad. A MUSICAL, that most lightweight form of music ever invented, despised by anyone who thought that pop/rock music could be an alternative to commercial exploitation of popular music (aptly named "Underground"). Lousy songs in the Archies/Cowsills/Partridge Family vein, with toecurling embarrassing lyrics, that are a travesty of the original message.
But, I am willing to admit that the lowest spark of the original fire may have been inspiring to you, Babson, and others."They" may try to convert an explosive message into a soothing one, by trying to exploit it "they" spread the fire.
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 2 guests