Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up)

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up)

    Some artists launched their careers on the vanguard, original and unique, they were immediately embraced by music fans of the era from which they emerged.

    Then, something happened.  They veered into the dreaded category that, for the sake of this discussion,  let's call pap.   The edge to the music vanished, many (not necessarily all) of the songs and lyrics became insipid, and again, for the sake of this discussion, let's just say they became commercialized, they cheapened what they had, and perhaps became slightly cheesy.  

    Now, this has not happened to all bands or solo artists, so why has it happened to some?   It may have been a matter of the lineup changing, but lineups can change without the music veering into pap territory, can't it?  Many artists may not continue as trendsetters for the length of their careers, but they also don't take the low road.  

    One of the most frequently mentioned names of course, is Sir Elton John.  Then, Fleetwood Mac.   How about Stevie Wonder?  Defend, deny or agree?   Who else?   

    It's okay if there was never anything *BUT* pap to begin with, that's different (and better) than taking your considerable reputation and tanking it.    What do you think?   Thoughts, anyone?
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up)

    Chicago

    Which is not to say that their later oeuvre was not technically good or even complex music, it's just that their earlier experimental, challenging pursuits gave way to a more mainstream sensibility.

    In some ways, it could just be called "getting old", but that's just coincidental, I think.

    (A variation on this topic appears humorously in Trainspotting.)
     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up)

    In Response to Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up):
    [QUOTE]In Response to Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up) : Well, first, I WILL defend Elton and Stevie.  Elton's song book is as big as the Beatles!  Ok, so Philadephia Freedm svcks, and he copped a couple crappy disco tunes - he's got a THOUSAND (literally) that didn't.  Stevie?  Can't think of any, but again, SO WHAT? - Look at the breadth of his work. Was Led Zep's "The Crunge" too funky?  Page has ALWAYS been funky. The thread title (fellow musians) reminds me of the minor-major chord. D-F-A-C#      Minor triad, major 7th. Its the 3rd chord in Us and Them, Pink Floyd.  Deep, dark and hauntingly empty. Ah,  Pink Floyd! Just as Earth, Wind and Fire own the b9 chord. Balls
    Posted by GreginMeffa[/QUOTE]

    I hear ya.  I know, the catalog is huge. 

    You'd have to stack all the albums up and see what ones caused the tanking to begin, I guess.  

    How long was Elton "King" and how long was he into "pap"  -- that's the million dollar question.   

    Scope of the entire catalog, sure, no question.   No landslide, though?  

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up)

    In Response to Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up):
    [QUOTE]Chicago Which is not to say that their later oeuvre was not technically good or even complex music, it's just that their earlier experimental, challenging pursuits gave way to a more mainstream sensibility. In some ways, it could just be called "getting old", but that's just coincidental, I think. (A variation on this topic appears humorously in Trainspotting .)
    Posted by MattyScornD[/QUOTE]

    I agree, it's not just a matter of "getting old" -- plenty of musicians have careers that span 30-40-50 years.   Doesn't mean a devolution is taking place.  

    That's what I really am implying - DEvolving.  It's okay to stay the same -- nothing new is happening, but you don't wake up one day and hear yourself writing, "I just called to say I love you" either.  :(

    Matty, what do you think about Stevie Wonder?  Too harsh a criticism?   

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up)

    In Response to Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up):
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up) : I agree, it's not just a matter of "getting old" -- plenty of musicians have careers that span 30-40-50 years.   Doesn't mean a devolution is taking place.   That's what I really am implying - DEvolving.  It's okay to stay the same -- nothing new is happening, but you don't wake up one day and hear yourself writing, "I just called to say I love you" either.  :( Matty, what do you think about Stevie Wonder?  Too harsh a criticism?   
    Posted by yogafriend[/QUOTE]


    Well, to me, there isn't much daylight between "Isn't She Lovely" and "I Just Called..." given that they're both the tender, gushy side of Stevie.

    (I wrote a longer post, but it didn't save.  Add'l examples were The Boss and Elvis C....)
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up)

    Electric Light Orchestra

    Out of the Blue was a big letdown...the sound was much too sweet and sugary.

    Then the ultimate slap in the face...Discovery...or Very Disco, as I call it.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up)

    I would never fault any artist for trying to make money.

    If I had talent like this , I sure as hell would want to be paid for my art.

    People b*tch and complain about bands "selling out" and becoming "commercialized"...well fine , don't buy it!

    I , for one , find some "commercially acceptable music to be pretty darn good. I also find alot of "underground" music to be very good.

    One example of a band that is ostracised and badly criticized for "selling out" is Jefferson Starship. For all the complaining and criticism, the fact is the music may be highly commercial, but some of it is very melodic and the lyrics are not poorly written. These are talented people that wanted to make some money doing something they enjoyed. Some of us paid money for it and don't regret the purchase. Craig Chacquico is a highly under-rated guitar player and I absolutely love the song 'Jane; from the Freedom at Point Zero LP ( one of their biggest hits).

    Fleetwood Mac was highly commercial in their final version. The two earlier versions made better ( in my opinion) music but didn't sniff the charts here in America. Thes guys have got to eat too. Many people like the Buckingham/Nicks version of the band , and I admit they may have been commercial, but you can't say the music is "pap." These are accomplished singers, players and somgwriters and maybe if their music hadn't sold so well they would be darlings of the counter-culture or underground. Their only fault is that lots of people liked their music and shelled out alot of money to own it. You cannot blame them for wanting this kind of success.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from carnie. Show carnie's posts

    Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up)

    In Response to Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up):
    [QUOTE]Chicago Which is not to say that their later oeuvre was not technically good or even complex music, it's just that their earlier experimental, challenging pursuits gave way to a more mainstream sensibility. In some ways, it could just be called "getting old", but that's just coincidental, I think. (A variation on this topic appears humorously in Trainspotting .)
    Posted by MattyScornD[/QUOTE]It's funny you should mention Chicago. I had the good fortune to study music with Chuck Winfield who played trumpet with Blood Sweat & Tears, and he never had a good word to say about Chicago. I remember him saying that if you listened to BS & T "You could tell we were blowing our brains out" while chicago seemed to be playing it pretty safe.
     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up)

    In Response to Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up):
    [QUOTE]I would never fault any artist for trying to make money. If I had talent like this , I sure as hell would want to be paid for my art. People b*tch and complain about bands "selling out" and becoming "commercialized"...well fine , don't buy it! I , for one , find some "commercially acceptable music to be pretty darn good. I also find alot of "underground" music to be very good. One example of a band that is ostracised and badly criticized for "selling out" is Jefferson Starship. For all the complaining and criticism, the fact is the music may be highly commercial, but some of it is very melodic and the lyrics are not poorly written. These are talented people that wanted to make some money doing something they enjoyed. Some of us paid money for it and don't regret the purchase. Craig Chacquico is a highly under-rated guitar player and I absolutely love the song 'Jane; from the Freedom at Point Zero LP ( one of their biggest hits). Fleetwood Mac was highly commercial in their final version. The two earlier versions made better ( in my opinion) music but didn't sniff the charts here in America. Thes guys have got to eat too. Many people like the Buckingham/Nicks version of the band , and I admit they may have been commercial, but you can't say the music is "pap." These are accomplished singers, players and somgwriters and maybe if their music hadn't sold so well they would be darlings of the counter-culture or underground. Their only fault is that lots of people liked their music and shelled out alot of money to own it. You cannot blame them for wanting this kind of success.
    Posted by ZILLAGOD[/QUOTE]

    Rant is fine :)  ... but I wasn't addressing the sell-out aspect (we've been down the road a bunch of times) POV in my OP.  That's a reason for making a change.  I don't care about the reasoning in this instance.  I was addressing the music and the music alone.  I used the word commercialized as a descriptor, for lack of a better one.   

    There were artists that had a winning style, or call it a formula, all their own -- truly unique and they were already branded and successful, there was no *reason* to veer into pap, they just did, and you, the fan, were disappointed (not disillusioned).  

    It's not a matter of finding fault with the music, it's more a matter of personal taste, to which we are all entitled.  It's saying that once the music took a turn, many fans also took a turn, and that was turning away, plain and simple.  It's more a matter of saying that the change was regrettable, IMO.  

    By the way, I don't see anyone citing Steely Dan.   Just wondering --  they did not go this route.   See, not everyone does.  (I'm thinking the answer is no)  

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up)

    In Response to Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up):
    [QUOTE]Electric Light Orchestra Out of the Blue was a big letdown...the sound was much too sweet and sugary. Then the ultimate slap in the face...Discovery...or Very Disco, as I call it.
    Posted by Hfxsoxnut[/QUOTE]

    Very clever.  

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up)

    In Response to Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up):
    [QUOTE]  By the way, I don't see anyone citing Steely Dan.  Just wondering -- did they or did they not go this route? (I'm thinking the answer is no)  
    Posted by yogafriend[/QUOTE]

    Interesting example.

    I suppose it may depend on how they were perceived in the first place, because Steely Dan was almost always a contrivance of the studio aesthetic and the emphasis on product...which is often the criticism of pop - its hermetic sterility.

    As I began to say earlier, I think the audience bears some responsibility for their own fickle natures.

    Last week, I heard a comment from a guy who had seen Bruce at the garden.  He said something like, 'yeah, he played a bunch of new songs, but I really wanted to hear 'Thunder Road'...'

    Really?!?  The guy has hundreds of songs in his catalog, and you pitch a fit if he doesn't play 'Rosalita'...??!  Why not just stay home?!
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up)

    In Response to Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up):
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up) : Rant is fine :)  ... but I wasn't addressing the sell-out aspect (we've been down the road a bunch of times) POV in my OP.  That's a reason for making a change.  I don't care about the reasoning in this instance.  I was addressing the music and the music alone.  I used the word commercialized as a descriptor, for lack of a better one.    There were artists that had a winning style, or call it a formula, all their own -- truly unique and they were already branded and successful, there was no *reason* to veer into pap, they just did, and you, the fan, were disappointed (not disillusioned).   It's not a matter of finding fault with the music, it's more a matter of personal taste, to which we are all entitled.  It's saying that once the music took a turn, many fans also took a turn, and that was turning away, plain and simple.  It's more a matter of saying that the change was regrettable, IMO.   By the way, I don't see anyone citing Steely Dan.  Just wondering -- did they or did they not go this route? (I'm thinking the answer is no)  
    Posted by yogafriend[/QUOTE]

    Steely Dan is one of my alltime favorites.

    I was considering doing a thread about them , but I haven't yet.

    There is loads and loads of things I would like to say about them.

    They pretty much were "commercially acceptable" and "commercially successful" right from the start. 'Do it Again' was the first single.. it was huge! Played alot back in '72 , when the great first album came out. I do not think they were a band that veered away from their original sound so much as they fused Jazz into their sound...because they liked it! And because by the time 'Aja' was made they were already a top rock band and could more or less persue a style of music they enjoyed playing.

    I can use many groups of the 70's and 80's as examples of bands that sold a whole lot of records. This was the Golden Age Of Rock 'n Roll ( to quote Mott The Hoople).

    These groups were very successful , many are accused of selling out or creating "commercial junk rock."

    Foriegner , Journey, Styx, Abba, Asia, Genesis.

    Billy Joel wrote and performed music that always charted well. He was a commercial success in all aspects of the term. Robin Trower was a guitar genius who had numerous great albums....many never got much attention from the mainstream. Few( if any) of Trower's songs are staples on "oldies" and "classic rock" stations...they don't meet the criteria of being old standards and "familiar favorites."

    I can sit and listen to Steely Dan, Billy Joel or Robin Trower albums for hours. It really never crosses my mind whether this is music that sold well in it's time or whether anyone else even gives a damn about it. I know I like it. 'Goodnight Saigon' By Billy Joel, 'Sign In Stranger' by Steely Dan and 'King Of The Dance' by Robin Trower are 3 af my favorites. You will never hear these played on Classic Rock radio. They weren't poular in their day as singles or even played much by anyone who didn't have the LP.

    But I can also enjoy 'Movin' Out' By Joel or 'Do It Again' or 'Josie' by Steely Dan and still love them as much today as I did when they first were released.

    Some music ( in my opinion) is just timeless and great and I can just enjoy it all the time. Whether people label it "pap" or "commercial"...well, these are just labels. Fleetwood Mac's song 'You Make Lovin' Fun' is just an extremely great song with good guitar licks, great beat and the lyrics are also very good.

    I can also enjoy a whole lot of songs that many casual Rock fans never even heard. I love these equally as much.

    I am very opinionated about what I dislike, but you know, if many other people like it , maybe it's me who is wrong. However, as long as I can listen to the stuff I like , it's realy hard to say that I am right and others are wrong.  I guess music is just this great pool of all kinds of stuff and you fish out the stuff you like and and call it your own. The "underground" or "noncommercial" music is just harder to gain access to and when you find something that is not in the mainstream and find out it's real good and you really like it, you want to tell everyone. But , as I've found out. most people don't give a damn. So it becomes your private pleasure. In some ways that makes all the more treasured...because you and you alone have these gems to enjoy all by yourself!!!

    But , surely I 've gone on too long.

    Thanks for allowing me the opportunity to stand on my podium.

    I assure you, I have been a "music snob" and realise now that it was wrong. Music is for all of us and people should listen to whatever they like. Don't let others influence you, don't be ashamed to say you like something that others consider "pap."

    I'm going to possibly shock alot of people by saying that 'Dancing Queen' by Abba is a song that I like to hear, and while a far cry from 'Paranoid' by Black Sabbath, I really do like this song, and never get tired of it...isn't that wierd?
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up)

    Take the podium all you want, Zilla. 

    Just last night I was in a fitness class that ended with Irene Caras' "What a Feeling" from Flashdance and I was laughing so hard I could barely do a pushup because I love that song so much -- and with a group that spans perhaps 25 years in age, every female in the class said the same thing.  :)   One of the greatest feel-good songs of the 20th century. :)

    My older brother told me that when his kids act up, his warning goes like this:  "If you don't behave, I'm warning you, I will play some Fleetwood Mac"  - HA HA.     So it goes.    :)
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up)

    In Response to Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up):
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up) : Interesting example. I suppose it may depend on how they were perceived in the first place, because Steely Dan was almost always a contrivance of the studio aesthetic and the emphasis on product ...which is often the criticism of pop - its hermetic sterility. As I began to say earlier, I think the audience bears some responsibility for their own fickle natures. Last week, I heard a comment from a guy who had seen Bruce at the garden.  He said something like, 'yeah, he played a bunch of new songs, but I really wanted to hear 'Thunder Road'...' Really?!?  The guy has hundreds of songs in his catalog, and you pitch a fit if he doesn't play 'Rosalita'...??!  Why not just stay home?!
    Posted by MattyScornD[/QUOTE]

    Steely Dan is a pretty good example of a mainstream, well-known band who had a very non-mainstream sensibility -- they were pretty off-beat, and I can't say I've ever been a big fan, although I love some of their biggest hits.  They did not, however, change that innovative sound, and they certainly didn't disappear into pap (again, for lack of a better word) either.  :P

    Sure, as consumers, we're entitled to be as fickle as we like, or as loyal to the core as we like, too.   It is funny in its own way when someone goes to a concert and only wants to hear all of the old radio hits -- that's nostalgia talking.  And it's uncertain how long nostalgia will continue to play a role in the coming years -- since the way we experience time (thanks in part to the internet, and the ability to look up, grab and listen to any music we want instantaneously) is vastly different than previous generations of listeners.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up)

    I saw a term ,"the perfect anti-heroes of the 70's" referring to Steely Dan.

    They were everything a Rock group wasn't supposed to be.

    Beckett and Fagen ( who WERE Steely Dan, with a bunch of very talented studio musicians) were from all accounts sticklers for detail and perfectionists. The rumor has it they tried 7 different guitarists to record the solo on one particular song.

    They did not like to tour and almost NEVER did live shows. Donald Fagen supposedly had stage fright and this is why there was a vocalist other than Fagen on the first album , taking lead vocals on a couple of tracks.

    They wrote "cerebral,wry and eccentric lyrics" and used "complex jazz- influenced structures and harmonies"....( direct quote from Wikipedia).

    They were at the same time, both a "singles" group and an "album" group....something that most 70's acts can't lay claim to have been ( except probably Paul McCartney/Wings , who's albums weren't as strong as those of Steely Dan).

    The name of the group comes from a rather surprising object that seems out of character for the style of music....look it up, I won't risk breaking forum policies!

    But, these guys do not belong on a thread about groups that "tanked" or "sold out" or "compromised" art for fame. They were truly anti-heroes. People who want their Rock bands to be like Led Zeppelin or the Rolling Stones or Aerosmith, con't figure these guys out. More of a thinking man's rock group. They appealed to a different audience in some regards, but then again , maybe not.

    Can a thinking man's Rock group achieve success among the head banging , loud noise of 70's Rock?

    They did. They were called Steely Dan. They did it their way and followed nobody's rules or guidelines....anti-heroes.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up)

    Zilla,
    I used Steely Dan as an example of a band that DID NOT go this route.   That was my point. 

    That's why I brought them up --- they didn't EVER veer over to pap.   I thought they were a prime example.  
    Can't seem to get in sync with you in this thread.   That's okay.  Rants, discussions, it all counts.  :)

    ETA: You got out of making a thread about Steely Dan, and you have me to thank.  :P
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from LloydDobler. Show LloydDobler's posts

    Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up)

    To me, the poster boy for this topic is one William Joel.

    He went from writing inspired songs like "Captain Jack," "You're My Home," "Piano Man" and "New York State of Mind" (among several, several others) to total drivel like "Uptown Girl," "Keeping the Faith," and "The Innocent Man," and "We Didn't Start the Fire" (among several, several, several others).
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up)

    In Response to Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up):
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up) : Steely Dan is a pretty good example of a mainstream, well-known band who had a very non-mainstream sensibility -- they were pretty off-beat, and I can't say I've ever been a big fan, although I love some of their biggest hits.  They did not, however, change that innovative sound, and they certainly didn't disappear into pap (again, for lack of a better word) either.  :P Sure, as consumers, we're entitled to be as fickle as we like, or as loyal to the core as we like, too.   It is funny in its own way when someone goes to a concert and only wants to hear all of the old radio hits -- that's nostalgia talking.  And it's uncertain how long nostalgia will continue to play a role in the coming years -- since the way we experience time (thanks in part to the internet, and the ability to look up, grab and listen to any music we want instantaneously) is vastly different than previous generations of listeners.
    Posted by yogafriend[/QUOTE]

    Yes, but there's also a large contingent of people who hear that slickness of Steely Dan in endless 'smooth jazz' contexts (and 'muzak') since, that they view it as 70's AM fluff...in spite of how technically innovative and stylistically diverse it really was.  The lyrics alone are just plain bizarre, but the lyrics aren't usually what comes to mind when they're mentioned.

    And I kind of disagree about the nostalgia part.  I think artists' jobs first are to create new work and expand on the themes they've done before.  If they want to play all new songs, then we should at least be willing to listen without our own bias for what we like and don't like getting in the way.

    It's unfortunate, because so much of music is commercially-driven, and musicians still have to make a living, which is not easy.  But if Elvis Costello wants to skip "Allison" altogether, because he's sick of playing it, then that's fine with me.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up)

    In Response to Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up):
    [QUOTE]Zilla, I used Steely Dan as an example of a band that DID NOT go this route.   That was my point.  That's why I brought them up --- they didn't EVER veer over to pap.   I thought they were a prime example.   Can't seem to get in sync with you in this thread.   That's okay.  Rants, discussions, it all counts.   :) ETA: You got out of making a thread about Steely Dan, and you have me to thank.   :P
    Posted by yogafriend[/QUOTE]

    Sorry my dear, I seem to have got caught up in the moment.

    Still it was lots of fun to rant and rave!

    I'm glad you like Steely Dan.

    I know all the albums backwards and forwards. Pretzel Logic is my favorite.

    I am still unsure of how one measures the success of an artist.

    Some people hate an artist when they go commercial and sell lots of records.

    Obviously be sheer volume of sales, many people become fans when a group breaks into the mainstream.

    As I think I've indicated in my lengthy cyber-tantrums, there is no way to please everyone. A band is successful and gets lots of airplay, sell lots of records and goes mainstream....some fool comes along and says ,"these guys sold out...I can't stand the music they make nowadays"...I remember hearing this from people who were big fans of Metallica, but after the 'Load' and 'Reload' LPs were released, they were disgusted. Funny thing is , I actually liked these two LPs more than the earlier ones. I like the later Styx LPs, after they became "commercial" and somehow became distasteful to the older fans.

    It's a funny world....people are just too wierd for me to figure out.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from RogerTaylor. Show RogerTaylor's posts

    Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up)

    In Response to Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up):
    [QUOTE]I saw a term ,"the perfect anti-heroes of the 70's" referring to Steely Dan. They were everything a Rock group wasn't supposed to be. Beckett and Fagen ( who WERE Steely Dan, with a bunch of very talented studio musicians) were from all accounts sticklers for detail and perfectionists. The rumor has it they tried 7 different guitarists to record the solo on one particular song. They did not like to tour and almost NEVER did live shows. Donald Fagen supposedly had stage fright and this is why there was a vocalist other than Fagen on the first album , taking lead vocals on a couple of tracks. They wrote "cerebral,wry and eccentric lyrics" and used "complex jazz- influenced structures and harmonies"....( direct quote from Wikipedia). They were at the same time, both a "singles" group and an "album" group....something that most 70's acts can't lay claim to have been ( except probably Paul McCartney/Wings , who's albums weren't as strong as those of Steely Dan). The name of the group comes from a rather surprising object that seems out of character for the style of music....look it up, I won't risk breaking forum policies! But, these guys do not belong on a thread about groups that "tanked" or "sold out" or "compromised" art for fame. They were truly anti-heroes. People who want their Rock bands to be like Led Zeppelin or the Rolling Stones or Aerosmith, con't figure these guys out. More of a thinking man's rock group. They appealed to a different audience in some regards, but then again , maybe not. Can a thinking man's Rock group achieve success among the head banging , loud noise of 70's Rock? They did. They were called Steely Dan. They did it their way and followed nobody's rules or guidelines....anti-heroes.
    Posted by ZILLAGOD[/QUOTE]

    and for what it's worth...............they are in the Rock N Roll Hall of Fame too
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Major Minor -- Who Tanked? (or screwed up)

    I'm not quite a hardcore Steely Dan fan, but I think they produced a great body of work.  Personally I think they bridged the gap very nicely between being creative and different and being commercially appealing.    
     

Share