Anglo|Amero/philia|phoiba

[Bob Krajewski <lmi-angel!rpk>]

Boy, you guys really touched a sensitive nerve there.  A few observations:

. Look at things from a musical history point of view.  It is clear that
  the most vigorous forms of music on the worldwide scene all heavily borrow
  from American sources.  In other words: no blues, no America, no nothing.
  The United States has blues, gospel, jazz, r&b, rock and roll, funk,
  country, and many strange hybrids thereof (like big-band country
  ``cowboy'' jazz, the proto-funk/reggae r&b of New Orleans [well, that's
  what I hear in Allen Toussaint productions], and so on).  Ironically, most
  people in the US who don't really ``live'' with these kinds of music don't
  realise what their heritage is.  On the other hand, the rest of the world
  (especially Europe, and again especially England) does realise this.

. Since Americans in general are so ignorant of their musical heritage, many
  of them don't realise what possibilities lie in the music.  On the other
  hand, the British come from a different context, change things, and then
  sell it back to America in a new light.  The rhythms and styles are still
  there, but now the music works as ``pop'' rather than just ``folk'' music.
  Thus, the success of the Beatles, Stones, Eric Clapton, Culture Club, the
  Smiths, JAMC, etc.  And of course, you've got people like Hendrix and the
  Stray Cats (now don't laugh just because there's a conjunction between
  them) who had to England first to get support.  Not to mention many jazz,
  funk, and soul people.  Hip hop is just as big in Manchester and
  Birmingham (England) as it is over here.  On the other hand, all those 60s
  punk/pysche groups in the 'burbs of the USA were trying (at first) to
  sound the like Stones and the Yardbirds, who themselves loved American
  music. 

. To make things a little more relevant, take the sound of records.  It has
  been said that the English don't like music, but love the racket it
  makes.  It is somewhat true that these days (ever since about '79 or so)
  British indie and pop stuff tends sound ``interesting,'' or affected, or
  textural, or stylish.  American stuff is more straightforward, and
  usually the studio sound itself isn't interesting (just guitars, guitars,
  guitars); most US bands have one mode and stick to it.

. The Emperor Has No Clothes: (anti-flame)

  . Synths are evil.
  . These American bands rely on songwriting and sincerity, not gimmicks.
  . The ``roots'' concept is valid.
  . The ``roots'' stuff you're hearing is really covers all the diversity
    of American music.
  . Pop is evil.
  . The studio is evil.
  . Amateurism is cool.
  . Beer-drinkin' music is honest.
  . Synth-poppers aren't rockists.
  . Loud guitars are always rad.
  . Jangle bands are less ``sound'' oriented than synth-crap.

So what do I like ?  Here are recent faves (in no particular order)

Art of Noise, the Bodeans (US group), Kate Bush (or else I'd be kicked off),
Can (getting into the back catalogue of the truly rhythmic and
``progressive'' German group), Husker Du, Bill Frisell & Vernon Reid, the
Residents, Big Stick, Volcano Suns, Birdsongs of the Mesozoic, Sam Cooke,
Scott Johnson, Pandoras, Elvis Costello, P/Funk, James Brown (30 Golden Hits
is domestic, remastered, and cheap, GET IT NOW, it's both ``roots'' [haha]
and RAD), Christmas, Dumptruck, O-Postive, Soul Asylum, Butthole Surfers,
Thomas Dolby, Throwing Muses, David Sylvain, Tom Waits, Hoodoo Gurus, Toure
Kunda, Love & Rockets, Camper Von Beethoven, and a cast of thousands.

Cool American Producer: T-Bone Burnett.

Cool Region: New Zealand.

Hoffman Bullseye Review: Big Audio Dynamite.