The Clash

[Ilmater]

I like basically everything but country music, but I just don't get why people hold this band in such high regard. I listened to all of "London Calling" and I didn't hear anything that was just so amazing that it deserves to be considered one of the greatest albums ever.

Can someone tell me of any other good songs by them so that maybe I'll get something I'm missing? Any album.

I would appreciate it.

 

[FreshFish]

I agree with you. I think there are a few gems of theirs (Rudy can't fail, Jimmy Jazz, Lost in the Supermarket, Wrong 'em Boyo, etc) but I never understood either...

 

[Brainonska511]

I thought London Calling was awesome, maybe not greatest albums, but still really good.

 

[DaveSimmons]

A large part of the respect they get is for when they did it, and their influence on musicians after them.

A lot of the Beatles' material is dated and not too impressive if you hear it without knowing who they are.

For punk I'm more of a fan of Oingo Boingo (try Only A Lad), X and the Sex Pistols than the Clash but as with all music that's just personal preference.

 

[Muse]

I too think The Clash a vastly overrated band. I realize it's kind of personal what you like in music, what you don't, what you think of as great, crappy, etc. I like some of their songs, especially "Lose this Skin" off Sandinista.

Other songs I think are OK (again, I would certainly not call myself a Clash fan):

Call Up
Career Opportunieies
Bored with the USA is OK

 

[KarenMarie]

I was never a fan of the clash and i was around when they came out.

just never liked their stuff.

 

[dwell]

The Clash is for people who want to pretend they are listening to "music that matters." London Calling was a good album. But they're too much like U2 -- too much preachin' not enough rockin'.

 

[Leper Messiah]

I always liked Bad Religion better than The Clash.

 

[Muse]

Originally posted by: Leper Messiah
I always liked Bad Religion better than The Clash.

Kind of a strange comparison. The Clash were earlier and Brits. If I were to make comparisons it would be with bands like:

Crass
Dexy's Midnight Runners
The Stranglers
The Sex Pistols
Discharge
GBH
The Damned

 

[pulse8]

Just like a lot of other types of music and movies, sometimes you have to be around at the time to really get it.

See the Star Wars thread for another example.

 

[Muse]

Originally posted by: pulse8
Just like a lot of other types of music and movies, sometimes you have to be around at the time to really get it.

See the Star Wars thread for another example.

The Star Wars thread? Link? There's over 20 hits right now when you search OT for Star Wars.

 

[Pacfanweb]

I think the Clash was more respected by other bands than there were/are by the general public. I was in HS when they were big and they weren't even close to being one of the most popular or even one of the best "under the radar" bands back then, at least not where I live.

Not that they're bad, but they really weren't that good, either. As someone said, they get their fame from the time period, not from their actual work.
Just like the Sex Pistols do.

 

[TBone48]

Originally posted by: KarenMarie
I was never a fan of the clash and i was around when they came out.

just never liked their stuff.

Same here. Elvis Costello & the Attractions were much better.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: TBone48

Originally posted by: KarenMarie
I was never a fan of the clash and i was around when they came out.

just never liked their stuff.

Same here. Elvis Costello & the Attractions were much better.

Elvis Costello was great but more mainstream and commercial than the Clash. He produced many more hits while the Clash was kind of the bridge band that made Punk mainstream. All I know is that they were a refreshing change from the stuff that was popular back when the first hit the scene. I can totally understand how todays youth/20 somethings don't get them.

I loved the late Joe Strummer but it was an aquired taste.

 

[moshquerade]

:music: Did you stand by me
No, not at all
Did you stand by me
No way :music:

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: Ilmater
I like basically everything but country music, but I just don't get why people hold this band in such high regard. I listened to all of "London Calling" and I didn't hear anything that was just so amazing that it deserves to be considered one of the greatest albums ever.

Can someone tell me of any other good songs by them so that maybe I'll get something I'm missing? Any album.

I would appreciate it.

My father once asked me the same question about Rock and Roll. He did not grow up with it and he could not understand the appeal.

 

[Red Dawn]

:music:This is Radio Clash
Stealing all transmissions
Beaming from the mountaintop
Using aural ammunition:music:

 

[LookingGlass]

Clash, yes they are overrated, boils down to personal preference.

Give me The Smiths. Or Depeche Mode.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: LookingGlass
Clash, yes they are overrated, boils down to personal preference.

Give me The Smiths. Or Depeche Mode.

Both great and commercially successful bands who owe a lot to bands like the Clash and Sex Pistols

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

This thread is full of the dopiest comparisons ever.

The Clash were brilliant, and IMO they have one of the strongest, tightest discographies of any band, ever. Even the slightly bloated Sandinista! (I recall reading an interview with the late Joe Strummer in which he said they were smoking so much pot while recording that album that he nearly turned into a bush) is great.

In terms of bands that were their actual contemporaries, the Saints (from Australia) are probably my personal favorite - their first two albums are my favorite '70s punk records - but the Clash were definitely more influential. I love the Buzzcocks as well, though their music is much poppier.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: DonVito
This thread is full of the dopiest comparisons ever.

The Clash were brilliant, and IMO they have one of the strongest, tightest discographies of any band, ever. Even the slightly bloated Sandinista! (I recall reading an interview with the late Joe Strummer in which he said they were smoking so much pot while recording that album that he nearly turned into a bush) is great.

In terms of bands that were their actual contemporaries, the Saints (from Australia) are probably my personal favorite - their first two albums are my favorite '70s punk records - but the Clash were definitely more influential. I love the Buzzcocks as well, though their music is much poppier.

The Clash made English Punk and even Punk in general more mainstream. That's why I stated that a lot of bands mentioned in this thread owe a lot to the Clash.

 

[sandorski]

You had to be there.

 

[TBone48]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: TBone48

Originally posted by: KarenMarie
I was never a fan of the clash and i was around when they came out.

just never liked their stuff.

Same here. Elvis Costello & the Attractions were much better.

Elvis Costello was great but more mainstream and commercial than the Clash. He produced many more hits while the Clash was kind of the bridge band that made Punk mainstream. All I know is that they were a refreshing change from the stuff that was popular back when the first hit the scene. I can totally understand how todays youth/20 somethings don't get them.

I loved the late Joe Strummer but it was an aquired taste.

I can see that. I just thought they were a little "soft" compared to the hard-core punk I was listening to. All these years later I appreciate them more but they're still not my "thing".

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: TBone48

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: TBone48

Originally posted by: KarenMarie
I was never a fan of the clash and i was around when they came out.

just never liked their stuff.

Same here. Elvis Costello & the Attractions were much better.

Elvis Costello was great but more mainstream and commercial than the Clash. He produced many more hits while the Clash was kind of the bridge band that made Punk mainstream. All I know is that they were a refreshing change from the stuff that was popular back when the first hit the scene. I can totally understand how todays youth/20 somethings don't get them.

I loved the late Joe Strummer but it was an aquired taste.

I can see that. I just thought they were a little "soft" compared to the hard-core punk I was listening to. All these years later I appreciate them more but they're still not my "thing".

Well back in the days Punk really wasn't about musicianship. The Clash were one of the first to combine good musical ability with the rawness of punk.

 

[AlienCraft]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
A large part of the respect they get is for when they did it, and their influence on musicians after them.

A lot of the Beatles' material is dated and not too impressive if you hear it without knowing who they are.

For punk I'm more of a fan of Oingo Boingo (try Only A Lad), X and the Sex Pistols than the Clash but as with all music that's just personal preference.

I did lighting design and operation for them during the '80s in SF.
< eligble for 6 degress / Kevin Bacon