Rubber Soul: The First Psychedelic Album
Olom...@aol.com
Late 1965.
Give the word a chance to say
That the word is just the way
It's the word I'm thinking of
And the only word is love
It's so fine, It's sunshine
It's the word, love
Say the word,
LOVE
Even the LP's title sounds like a band from the Fillmore in 1967
"Iron Butterfly and Steppenwolf on Friday, Saturday will have Rubber
Soul...."
~Bill Graham
:)
Andrew Kirschner
Word", that breathing noise on "Girl", and that Indian thingimigigie on
"Norweigian Wood". It'll blow your mind!
Runnnerr
Too cool!!! I think that I'll have Indian food for dinner tonight,
break out the black light bulb, read some Ram Dass and drown myself in
music from 1965-1967.
MikeLawyr2
tambourine, not to mention the rich harmonies. But that wasn't enough,
apparently, so bring on . . . "fuzz bass."
Chris Jepson
> I wouldn't call Rubber Soul psychedelic but, on the other hand, I
> don't know what I would call "the first psychedelic album." I own no
> 1965 album which I'd comfortably label "psychedelic" as a whole, but
> the floodgates opened with 1966 and I haven't researched which of
> those albums arrived first in the year.
>
> Glancing through this list
> (http://rateyourmusic.com/top_albums/year_is_1965) for reference,
> the year's free-jazz albums seem more psychedelic in spirit to me
> than any of the pop albums.
>
> Based on what I can easily recall, the Kinks' "See My Friends" gets
> my vote as the most psychedelic song of 1965 -- its droning, raga
> feel is more explicit than "Norwegian Wood"'s folk/raga hybrid.
> However, I can't remember if there are any "psychedelic" 1965 songs
> on my Nuggets box sets, without digging out the liner notes.
I love Rubber Soul but I also don't really think of it as psychedelic...
definitely experimental, and as we now know, influenced by pot, but I
think calling it psychedelic makes that term too broad to be very
meaningful.
My vote for the first really psychedelic album goes to "Sunshine Superman."
Chris Jepson
Rev. Love
rock/pop. Which turned into Psychedelia, IMHO. I think i read somewhere
the Elevators were first to be dubbed with the moniker "Psychedelic"
and for the use of it on their album cover.
You all should tune into Revolver Radio if you all like this stuff. I
play it all.
TAR
Pychedelic, Baby! Here, these will help you along. Have a fun trip.
http://www.nethumour.com/photos/images/illusion-image.png
http://inferno999.com/images/illusion_trippy(blinka_garna).jpg
http://www.kband.com/bluprnt/illusion.jpg
http://www.jp-petit.com/Inclassable/Illustrations/Illusion_optique.jpg
http://www.thecryptmag.com/Online/28/Images/illusion1.gif
http://www.nencetti.org/images/oi/illusion_49.jpg
http://www.patmedia.net/marklevinson/cool/cool_illusion.html
52stations
songwriting 1964
check out CHIMES OF FREEDOM
for imagery http://bobdylan.com/songs/chimes.html
plus the 1965 albums
Bringing It All Back Home and
Highway 61 Revisited
could also be considered
psychedelic blueprints as well
( as far as farout lyrics and music ,
not instrumental jams )
Dale Houstman
This is all semantics of course, depending upon one's understanding of
the word "psychedelic." Since it actually means "tending to create an
altered conscience" or [in the vernacular] to "blow one's mind" the
first psychedelic music might be said to be such fare as Indfan raga, or
the music played when whuirling dervishes "dervished" or - most likely -
the stuff some cavemen played as they worshipped the moon. Who knows?
Certainly, I've always considered the Dylan albums you mention as being
psychedelic. But earlier musicians (such as Thelonius Monk and Coltrane
and Son Ra) could "transport" a listener to a different place and time
as - or more - effectively. If one is looking for the first psychedelic
ROCK album, then it's a different story. Dylan is a good place to start
the game as far as I'm concerned, but I think the Burnette's "Train
Keeps A'Coming" is pretty mind-blowing itself. So who knows?
dmh
Olom...@aol.com
Bringing It All Back Home and
Highway 61 Revisited
could also be considered
psychedelic blueprints as well <<
Even the covers are "far out"
Check Dylan's shirt on 61...whoah.
While many say the Rubber Soul was more marijuana influenced, I think
you can feel the tinges of the acid they ingested in 65.
Of course none of this would have happend if Kesey didn't start
throwing his trippy "happenings" in SF beginning in late .64 and
throughout 1965. Word spread through the artistic underground
immediately.
But maybe 52stations is most accurate. After all, Mr. Tambourine Man is
a mind blower to this day.
DanKaye
psychedelic, most importantly, the album cover art and title. But the
music on Rubber Soul was not really very psychedelic.
The first psychedelic albums by major artists were probably "Freak
Out" by Frank Zappa and the Mothers of Invention, released in July of
1966, The Beatles' "Revolver" released on August 5th, 1966, or
Donovan's "Sunshine Superman" released in Sept. of 1966.
The bottom line is, there were some artists such as the Dead, Donovan,
the Airplane, Zappa, Doors, etc. who were playing psychedelic music in
1965, but most of the albums did not come out until 66 and 67.
I think some of the earliest RECORDED psychedelic albums (from 66, and
67) were:
Rubber Soul - recorded Oct-Nov 65 (I don't really consider this a
psychedelic album, musically, but it did help usher in the
psychedelic era; the cover alone makes it a candidate for one of the
1st psych. albums; The Beatles' influence and popularity makes this an
important psychedelic release)
My Generation - The Who - recorded April to Oct 65 (I don't consider
The Who a psychedelic band, but I saw them in 1965 opening for
Herman's Hermits, and their performance WAS psychedelic
Freak Out - by Frank Zappa and the Mothers - recorded March 66 * This
may be THE first psychedelic album released by a major artist
with longevity
Sunshine Superman - recorded 65 and 66
The Byrds - 5D - recorded Jan. to May 66 (not a psych. album, but
"Eight Miles High" is a psychedelic song)
the Great Society with Grace Slick - lp not released til later, but
I believe it was recorded in 66 (or 67?)
Jefferson Airplane Surrealistic Pillow - recorded in 66
Electric Music - Country Joe - recorded in 66
the Doors - recorded in 66
Revolver - recorded April - June 66
Are You Experienced - Jimi Hendrix - recorded Oct. 66 to April 67
Grateful Dead's 1st - recorded in 67
Pink Floyd's "Piper" - recorded in 67
I do not include groups like the 13th Floor Elevators and Love because
they did not sell many albums nor make much of a splash in the history
of psychedelic music. Just my own bias.
So most of these groups, though already forging the psychedelic sound,
in live performances, in 65 and 66, did not release psychedelic
records until 66 and 67.
**********************
FROM WIKIPEDIA:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychedelic_music :
"History
In 1962 British rock embarked on a frenetic race of ideas that spread
back to the U.S. with the British Invasion. The folk music scene also
experimented with outside influences. In the tradition of Jazz and
blues music many musicians began to take drugs, and include drug
references in their songs. In 1965 Bob Dylan was influenced by The
Beatles to bring in electric rock instrumentation in his album
Bringing It All Back Home, but The Byrds beat him to it with a
jangling electric hit single version of a track from the album with
hints of psychedelia, Mr. Tambourine Man.
[edit]
Psychedelia began in the United States folk scene, with New York
City's Holy Modal Rounders introducing the term in 1964. A similar
band called Mother McCree's Uptown Jug Champions from San Francisco
were influenced by the Byrds and the Beatles to switch from acoustic
music to electric music in 1965. Renaming themselves the Warlocks,
they fell in with Ken Kesey's LSD-fueled Merry Pranksters in November
1965, and changed their name to the Grateful Dead the following month.
The Dead played to light shows at the Pranksters' "Acid Tests", with
pulsing images being projected over the group in what became a
widespread practice. Their sound soon became identified as Acid rock
which they played at the Trips Festival in January 1966 along with Big
Brother & the Holding Company. The festival was held at the Fillmore
Auditorium and was attended by some 10,000 people. For most of the
attendees, it was their first encounter with both acid-rock and LSD.
Throughout 1966, the San Francisco music scene flourished, as the
Fillmore, the Avalon Ballroom, and the Matrix club began booking local
rock bands on a nightly basis. The emerging "San Francisco Sound" made
local stars of numerous bands, including the Charlatans, Quicksilver
Messenger Service, Country Joe and the Fish, The Great Society, and
the folk-rockers Jefferson Airplane, whose debut album was recorded
during the winter of 1965/66 and released in August 1966. Jefferson
Airplane Takes Off was the first album to come out of San Francisco
during this era and sold well enough to bring the city's music scene
to the attention of the record industry.
....
In the United Kingdom, Donovan, going electric like Dylan, had a 1965
hit with Sunshine Superman, one of the very first overtly psychedelic
pop records. Pink Floyd had been developing psychedelic rock with
light shows since 1965 in the underground culture scene, and in 1966
the Soft Machine formed. In August 1966 The Beatles joined in the fun
with their Revolver featuring psychedelia in "Tomorrow Never Knows"
and in "Yellow Submarine" which combined these references with appeal
to children and nostalgia, a formula repeated in "Strawberry Fields
Forever" which would keep their music widely popular. From a blues
rock background, the British supergroup Cream debuted in December. The
Jimi Hendrix Experience with Noel Redding and Mitch Mitchell brought
Jimi Hendrix fame in Britain, and later in his American homeland."
DanKaye
<closeupthe...@aol.com> wrote:
>If you rate Rubber Soul as "psychedelic" just based on the cover,
I said, to be accurate, that ""I think Rubber Soul was experimental
and had some elements of psychedelia, most importantly, the album
cover art and title. But the music on Rubber Soul was not really very
psychedelic."
>you sure ought to give a similar stamp to 5D. That cover is (eight?)
>miles more psychedelic than Rubber Soul.
I will give it that stamp! It was a psychedelic cover, and that's
another reason why I put "5D" 5th on my list of early psychedelic
albums.
>And have you *heard* this
>whole album? "I See You," "Captain Soul" and "Hey Joe" come off
>psychedelic..."Mr. Spaceman" doesn't sound psychedelic but has that
>outer-space lyric..."What's Happening?!?!" has a psychedelic guitar
>solo..."2-4-2 Fox Trot" is pure filler, with hardly any purpose
>EXCEPT creating a psychedelic mood.... I'd say 5D definitely
>deserves to be called a psychedelic album, even if *every* track
>isn't in that vein.
>
Yes, I have heard the whole album, though admittedly not lately. But I
still say it is not really a "psychedelic album" overall, but does
have some psychedelic songs, most notably "Eight Miles High". I would
not argue your point, however. It was certainly one of the early
psychedelic influences,and maybe it was a "psychedelic record".
By the way, I am a HUGE Byrds fan, I own most everything they
recorded, and love even their later albums. I started listening to
them as soon as I heard "Mr. Tambourine Man" in early '65. Their
Greatest Hits collections are really solid clasic rock, and their
individual albums such as "Sweetheart of the Rodeo" and "Ballad of
Easy Rider" are classic in their own right.
paramucho
<closeupthe...@aol.com> wrote:
>Chris Jepson <cje...@mail.med.upenn.edu> wrote:
>
>> My vote for the first really psychedelic album goes to "Sunshine Superman."
>
>Some arguably psychedelic albums from 1966 that I have...which came
>first? I have no idea.
>
>Sunshine Superman
>Mothers of Invention/Freak Out!
>Byrds/Fifth Dimension
>Beatles/Revolver (still debatable, but a lot more psych than Rubber
>Soul)
>Love/Love
>The Blues Magoos/Psychedelic Lollipop (later in the year, I
>imagine...comes off like a bandwagon-jumper)
>The Yardbirds/Roger the Engineer
>Cream/Fresh Cream
>Jefferson Airplane/Takes Off (perhaps this is more folk-rock)
>The Seeds/The Seeds
>
>And I don't own the first Thirteenth Floor Elevators album myself,
>but that's from 1966 and is certainly a contender.
If we're talking psychedelic, does chronology really apply?
Andrew Kirschner
Yes the cover is part of it. But it's also some trippy organ sounds in
"The Word" and "I'm Looking Through You", the unpredictable breathing
and crash symbols of "Girl", the fuzz bass of "Think For Yourself",
John's increasingly druggy vocals--his lethargic psychedelic voice is
invented, if not perfected here--on "Norweigian Wood" and "Nowhere
Man", the sitar on "Norweigian Wood" and (seemingly) "Girl", and indeed
"Norweigian Wood" itself, with its floating, narcotic feel. And the
whole message of "The Word" is psychedelia to a tee. Psychedlia woould
be much more prounounced on REVOLVER, and the Beatles of yore wouldn't
disappear for good until SGT PEPPER, but these elements first see the
light of day with RUBBER SOUL.
:-) Andrew
DanKaye
<andrewk...@mindspring.com> wrote:
So we're proclaiming to all the world (or, at least anyone who cares
to look for the answer at google groups) that the honor of the first
psychedelic lp belongs to the Beatles, with Rubber Soul?
Okay, why not?
Someone should write a Wikipedia entry.
BlackMonk
"poisoned rose" <closeupthe...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:xPw3g.5723$Lm5...@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com...
> DanKaye <dan...@nowhere.info wrote:
>
>> I do not include groups like the 13th Floor Elevators and Love because
>> they did not sell many albums nor make much of a splash in the history
>> of psychedelic music. Just my own bias.
>
If influencing both Jimi Hendrix and Jim Morrison isn't much of a splash,
what is?
DanKaye
Well, that is something. But I was totally into all the current music
of the time, into a lot of obscure psychedelic groups, and I nor my
friends ever listened to them. I do recall hearing them once and not
being impressed. Apparently the majority of record buying hippies
agreed with me, as they didn't become a household name.
To each his own. Maybe if I heard them now I'd like them... But all
I'm saying is I was never impressed with them at the time.
Olom...@aol.com
to look for the answer at google groups) that the honor of the first
psychedelic lp belongs to the Beatles, with Rubber Soul?
Okay, why not? <<<
There is a good argument for Dylan's "Bringing it All Back Home" but
since Bob never, ever truly owned up to doing psychedelics, whereas The
Beatles did and quite quickly..I believe the honor should go to them
and the masterpiece that is "Rubber Soul"
Dale Houstman
I don't see why. Just because Dylan didn't "own up" to doing
psychedelics does not constitute a valid reason to claim his early
albums aren't psychedelic. He did "own up" to reading Rimbaud and the
French Symbolists, and tha can be a pretty mind-blowing experience in
and of itself. The English group The Move (and other groups) claim they
never did anything stronger than lager, and yet it would be beyond silly
to not say such a song as "I Can Hear The Grass Grow" is not psychedelic
because it was written on beer. The term psychedelic doesn't necessarily
refer to work produced while on certain psychotropic drugs, but to a set
of vaguely-defined musical traits (many production effects) and a
tendency to produce a drug-like reaction in the listener. Rubber Soul
doesn't do this in the main, despite the presence of "The Word" and
"Norwegian Wood." I've always heard Rubber Soul as a rather
acoustic-feeling album. But I will say that I was put in an alternate
state by first hearing "Like A Rolling Stone" on the radio.
dmh
Olom...@aol.com
psychedelics does not constitute a valid reason to claim his early
albums aren't psychedelic.<<
It doesn't. I was just being petty.
Dale Houstman
Tom or Richard?
dmh
Dale Houstman
Rev. Love wrote:
> Rubber Soul is definitely Psychedelic. Albeit Folk Psych. Same with the
> Byrds.
>
To each their own of course, but I'd say the "definitely" is overstating
the case, especially as it seems NOT to be obvious to many of us.
"Norweigian Wood" yes, "The Word" to a certain degree, but that's about
it. The Byrds were "folk psych" but their first album or so was more
like Rubber Soul, much more folk than psych.
But - really - it's scarcely worth debating.
dmh
BlackMonk
"Dale Houstman" <dm...@skypoint.com> wrote in message
news:44518676...@skypoint.com...
>
>
> Rev. Love wrote:
>> Rubber Soul is definitely Psychedelic. Albeit Folk Psych. Same with the
>> Byrds.
>>
>
> To each their own of course, but I'd say the "definitely" is overstating
> the case, especially as it seems NOT to be obvious to many of us.
> "Norweigian Wood" yes, "The Word" to a certain degree, but that's about
> it. The Byrds were "folk psych" but their first album or so was more like
> Rubber Soul, much more folk than psych.
>
I'd say the Byrds were folk or they were psych, but rarely if ever both at
the same time. To put that in context, I wouldn't call Rubber Soul folk at
all. The Byrd were folk-rock because they played traditional material and
used instrumental techniques from folk music. Rubber Soul just had a lot of
acoustic guitars on it.
abe slaney
Lennon's voice had a psychedelic quality all his life. What is
psychedelic? I'm not sure I can say. People who have done psychedelics
probably have a point of view on the subject that is difficult to
express in words. I do. That's the nature of that kind of drug.
When I hear "and it's my mind, and there's no time when I"m alone", I
get a certain physical reaction that resonates with the vibe of
tripping. I can't say why, but I think you can find a lot of people who
agree that Lennon had a trippy voice, and that has nothing to do with
"production effects" or long jams or weird lyrics (not that they hurt)
or anything except the timbre and expression in his voice.
Dale Houstman
I must admit that I think you're a bit incorrect here: folk music
pervades the Byrds work from top to bottom, psychedelic or otherwise. In
the States, folk music is one of the defining sources of all music, and
(ala Jefferson Airplane) this influence is seen throughout the Byrds
psychedelic efforts. 60s American rock was thick with folk. And the
Byrds aren't folk just because they use traditional material and
traditional instrumentation: folk is about song structures, vocal
approach, and subject matter also, and you can hear that in their
psychedelic work. Those bands were not called "folk-psych" because they
used to be folk and now they're psych, but because their psych work was
founded on and informed by their folk background. About the Beatles:
yeah, I'd say you're correct that the sound of Rubber Soul isn't
massively folk by any strict definition (although British rock was
heavily informed by folk via skiffle also) but it is obviously
influenced by Dylan, and it does have a folk feel if not a strictly folk
sound. At least it strikes me as more folk than it is psychedelic.
dmh
Dale Houstman
It's not a sharp signifier for sure.
>People who have done psychedelics
> probably have a point of view on the subject that is difficult to
> express in words. I do. That's the nature of that kind of drug.
> When I hear "and it's my mind, and there's no time when I"m alone", I
> get a certain physical reaction that resonates with the vibe of
> tripping. I can't say why, but I think you can find a lot of people who
> agree that Lennon had a trippy voice, and that has nothing to do with
> "production effects" or long jams or weird lyrics (not that they hurt)
> or anything except the timbre and expression in his voice.
What is meant by psychedelic varies. There are the obvious sonic
"giveaways" (backwards guitar, odd pitch shifts, pulsating sounds,
extended "trance" solos, etc.) and the less obvious lyrical
approximations of the "psychedelic state" that can be see and heard in
Dylan's work. But it really gets dicey after that. I wouldn't say -
given this ambiguity - that Lennnon's voice "had a psychedelic quality
all his life" but that's my opinion: I'm not even sure what it means
with any useful certainty.
But really - let's just say the first psychedelic album by created by
The GumBallistics, and call it a night!
dmh
>
abe slaney
> But really - let's just say the first psychedelic album by created by
> The GumBallistics, and call it a night!
Sounds goom to de.
Olom...@aol.com
Nah.. that's old timey music. Retro fun. Part of the jugband craze.
I'd bet both Dylan and The Beatles dug 'em
Almost..An influence but not really the cigar winner.
Imho.
Olom...@aol.com
THE FIRST PSYCHEDELIC LP - ALAN WATTS' "THIS IS IT"
Contrary to what one might read, psychedelia didn't begin in 1966, and
it wasn't invented by the Beatles or Timothy Leary. Psychedelic
research and psychedelic culture had already existed for decades,
unknown to most except an esoteric jet-set of researchers, artists and
philosophers travelling along the London - Boston/N Y - California
axis. The atmosphere could be described as academic-bohemian,
incarnated in a few super-educated anglosaxons such as Gerald Heard and
Aldous Huxley. These men had the intellectual resources to incorporate
the mescaline and LSD experience into their already vast knowledge of
Western and Eastern thought, and rather than jolting them out of their
tracks it gave them concrete evidence and renewed energy.
Expatriate Englishman Alan Watts was already famous in California as an
eloquent lecturer and freewheeling thinker when he joined this
aristocratic gang of quiet revolutionaries, many of which he knew from
Oxbridge/Ivy League circles. Still, he wasn't quite like them; he was
from a younger generation (born 1915) and in touch with the beat
generation and its representatives. He wasn't a "rock'n'roller" but did
belong to a post-WWII mindset, while many of his colleagues came out of
an earlier T S Eliot/Bloomsbury Group world, with its remnants of
classicism and snobbery. When Watts decided to carry the acid torch for
a few years this marked an important event for psychedelia, as he was
able to bridge vastly different worlds; Oxford and North Beach, London
and San Francisco. Allen Ginsberg did a similar effort, coming from the
beat camp, and their combined efforts paved way for the merger of
psychedelia and pop-culture in the mid-1960s.
Alan Watts' key psychedelic work is the slim volume "The Joyous
Cosmology" (see details here), published in 1962. Essentially an
extension and variation on Aldous Huxley's "Doors Of Perception" it is
a tremendous reading experience, more concrete and direct than Huxley's
famous work. Both are building blocks in the psychedelic canon.
Much less known is the LP Alan Watts recorded and released the same
year. Titled "This Is IT" the album is in fact missing from all Watts
bibliographies I've seen, and it ranks as one of his rarest works. The
record's importance and uniqueness is only now beginning to see
recognition, and its earliest advocates were esoteric record collectors
rather than Watts admirers or psychedelic archivists. Its rarity is
somewhat puzzling as Watts had recorded and released two albums in the
same series and on the same label (MEA) in 1958-59, and these aren't
half as obscure.
The record is not easy to describe, and much in line with its theme it
remains an aural experience impossible to analyse in a structured way.
A key word to suggest its nature might be tribal. Referred to on the
back cover as a "spontaneous musical happening", its relationship with
the LSD testimonies in "The Joyous Cosmology" is made clear by explicit
mention and extensive quotes from this book
One central conclusion Watts derived from his LSD experiences as
presented in the book is the idea of life as goal-less play, which is
to be understood in a wider, zen-like context. Within this framework
lies the potential for insights, work and creativity. The recording of
a semi-improvised music and rapping session can then take on a number
of meanings; from good clean fun to a soundtrack for a deep
hallucinogenic journey. While there is no direct evidence that "This Is
IT" was facilitated with the aid of psychedelics, it was created at a
time when Watts' interest in such was at a peak. The real proof may be
in the grooves, and most people who hear it are likely to infer that
it's the outcome of an actual LSD session. It certainly sounds like it.
The LP begins with "an explosive dialogue" wherein Watts and associate
Roger Somers rap and ramble over a crude piano and percussion backdrop;
an extraordinary intensity rapidly builds and culminates in voices
screaming and chanting "loveyouloveyouloveyou", abrutply cut off with a
state of the art (for 1962) psychedelic echo effect. It's too tribal to
be avantgarde art, too crude to be free jazz, too freaky to be
rock'n'roll - it just is "IT", and that's all you can say about IT.
We are then greeted by Watts' delightful voice introducing the "Onion
Chant". The confident mid-Atlantic lecturer tone that was such a hit
with Bay Area radio listeners briefly recaps a theme from the acid
visions of "The Joyous Cosmology", namely that the spiritual student
finds himself in an infinite regress of self-realization, where he
steps out of his phony egos over and over, like peeling the skin of an
onion, until he reaches a point wherein there is almost nothing
"genuine" left -- and the subsequent realization isn't moksha, but
rather the insight that one is a fake. "He is artifice and insincerity,
through and through and through...". This rather harsh message of
liberation gives way to an extraordinary uptempo chant with conga drums
supporting Watts' seemingly ad libbed trip into an aboriginal tribesman
past. You can pick up the word "LSD" early in the chant, but this may
be coincidental.
Watts was, among many other things, a great admirer of Japanese culture
and tradition, which is echoed in the brief third track of instrumental
music. This is followed by an obviously improvised "floating soliloquy"
wherein Watts rambles like a true freak about whatever comes through
his mind, sounding more like a Shakespeare stage actor zonked on acid
than his eloquent lecturer self. "I am so strange in this... queer dark
old stewpot..." is just the beginning of the trip, which leads way to
some heavy metaphysical poetry about the human body and a rendezvous of
friends "high in the sky like the moon". These "Fingernail pairings",
supported by feeble avant-jazz snips, is as psychedelic as anything
you're ever likely to hear.
Side 1 closes with "Umdagumsubudu", a "controlled accident" with
frantic drumming and incomprehensible chanting back and forth,
exploring in full the African/Caribbean tribal voodoo feel present
throughout the album. It's spooky like an old Nonesuch field recording,
except that this is a bunch of white beatnik heads aboard a Sausalito
house-boat in 1962, rather than some age-old initiation rite.
Uncontrolled laughter and an outburst of Watts coughing puts the
listener right inside their freak scene.
Another strand in the colorful ball of "This Is IT" is the influence
from religious music of the ecstatic, devotional type. Some of the
rants have a tongue-speaking quality, while there is a clear presence
of liturgical wailing at the beginning of side 2. This is the
"Metamatic Ritual", a 14-minute "contemplative ritual mounting slowly
to ecstasy". The whole gang joins in with various percussion
instruments and chanting voices half-buried in the soundscape, the
total impression being very effective and enchanting. Although
improvised, it seems obvious that there was a clear group-mind at play
here, much like you can find on tribal acidrock albums such as Beat Of
The Earth, Yahowha 13 or Furekaaben; some call-response passages also
recall the Merry Pranksters recordings from 1965-66. "Metamatic Ritual"
is also the track which best displays the quality of the musicians,
with some excellent drum/conga interplay.
"The End" naturally takes us back to the beginning, as it is partly the
same track that opened the LP. There is some atmospheric, low-key
wailing from Watts and Roger Somers, before the craziness creeps back
in, with eerie piano excursions, percussion and incomprehensible
ramblings in invented languages; an excellent use of stereo is
demonstrated with the chanting voices taking up one channel each (side
1 is mono).
"This Is IT" is an extraordinary album on every level; it must be taken
into account in any serious chronicle of psychedelia. Even now, the
album appears highly advanced and challenging, its intensity certain to
surprise those expecting some bongo-beating beatniks mumbling about
nirvana. Timelessness, courage and a sense of absolute freedom makes it
a truly essential experience. The fact that it was created by one of
the portal figures of the mid-century's spiritual revolution is just
one aspect of its importance and appeal.
Lookingglass
> Dale Houstman <dm...@skypoint.com> wrote:
>
>> Just because Dylan didn't "own up" to doing
>> psychedelics does not constitute a valid reason to claim his early
>> albums aren't psychedelic.
>
> purely on the basis of lyrics. And there isn't *any* Dylan song
> which I'd call psychedelic based on its music.
"...take me on a trip upon your magic swirling ship..."
...sounds psychedelic to me... ;^) ...though, granted, not an album.
dave (...how often have you been there...)
www.Shemakhan.com
Lookingglass
> "Lookingglass" <Shem...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> > Personally, I don't think you can call any album "psychedelic,"
>> > purely on the basis of lyrics. And there isn't *any* Dylan song
>> > which I'd call psychedelic based on its music.
>>
>> "...take me on a trip upon your magic swirling ship..."
>>
>> ...sounds psychedelic to me... ;^)
>
...the song is a whole... complete... lyric and music... as conceived by
Dylan...
dave (...like a wind inside a letter box...)
www.Shemakhan.com
Lookingglass
> "Lookingglass" <Shem...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> >> > Personally, I don't think you can call any album "psychedelic,"
>> >> > purely on the basis of lyrics. And there isn't *any* Dylan song
>> >> > which I'd call psychedelic based on its music.
>> >>
>> >> "...take me on a trip upon your magic swirling ship..."
>> >>
>> >> ...sounds psychedelic to me... ;^)
>> >
>> > As I said above....
>>
>> ...the song is a whole... complete... lyric and music... as conceived by
>> Dylan...
>
> you... can... guess... how... far... Dylan's... eyes... roll...
> if... he's... asked... whether... the... song... is...
> "psychedelic"...
...sail on sailor... ;^)
dave (...you're gonna carry that weight a long time...)
www.Shemakhan.com
BlackMonk
>
>
> BlackMonk wrote:
>> "Dale Houstman" <dm...@skypoint.com> wrote in message
>> news:44518676...@skypoint.com...
>>
>>>
>>>Rev. Love wrote:
>>>
>>>>Rubber Soul is definitely Psychedelic. Albeit Folk Psych. Same with the
>>>>Byrds.
>>>>
>>>
>>>To each their own of course, but I'd say the "definitely" is overstating
>>>the case, especially as it seems NOT to be obvious to many of us.
>>>"Norweigian Wood" yes, "The Word" to a certain degree, but that's about
>>>it. The Byrds were "folk psych" but their first album or so was more like
>>>Rubber Soul, much more folk than psych.
>>>
>>
>>
>> I'd say the Byrds were folk or they were psych, but rarely if ever both
>> at the same time. To put that in context, I wouldn't call Rubber Soul
>> folk at all. The Byrd were folk-rock because they played traditional
>> material and used instrumental techniques from folk music. Rubber Soul
>> just had a lot of acoustic guitars on it.
>
> I must admit that I think you're a bit incorrect here: folk music pervades
> the Byrds work from top to bottom, psychedelic or otherwise.
I wouldn't say EVERYTHING. (Mind Gardens? Everybody's Been Burned? CTA 102?)
In
> the States, folk music is one of the defining sources of all music, and
> (ala Jefferson Airplane) this influence is seen throughout the Byrds
> psychedelic efforts. 60s American rock was thick with folk.
Depends what you're listening to. Folk was a big influence on the San
Francisco hippie bands. Not so much on The Beach Boys (Sloop John B
notwithstanding), The Velvet Underground, or the Paul Butterfield Blues
Band.
And the
> Byrds aren't folk just because they use traditional material and
> traditional instrumentation: folk is about song structures, vocal
> approach, and subject matter also, and you can hear that in their
> psychedelic work.
You have a point here. I can see the narrative sense of the lyrics in 8
Miles High being derived from folk music.
Those bands were not called "folk-psych" because they
> used to be folk and now they're psych, but because their psych work was
> founded on and informed by their folk background. About the Beatles: yeah,
> I'd say you're correct that the sound of Rubber Soul isn't massively folk
> by any strict definition (although British rock was heavily informed by
> folk via skiffle also) but it is obviously influenced by Dylan, and it
> does have a folk feel if not a strictly folk sound. At least it strikes me
> as more folk than it is psychedelic.
>
The only really psychedelic moment on the album is the harmonium fills on
The Word, which were played by George Martin. I guess some of the lyrics can
sound folkish if taken out of context. ("The other day I saw you as you
walked down the road," "It's been a long time, now I'm coming back home")
The thing about Dylan is that I really think a lot of the time he's
misclassified as a folk artist, at least after he went electric. There isn't
much folk music on Highway 61, for instance. He was a rock artist who
started out performing folk music.
> dmh
>
>
BlackMonk
"Rev. Love" <beat...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1146211058.1...@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >To each their own of course, but I'd say the "definitely" is overstating
>>the case, especially as it seems NOT to be obvious to many of us.
>>"Norweigian Wood" yes, "The Word" to a certain degree, but that's about
>>it. The Byrds were "folk psych" but their first album or so was more
>>like Rubber Soul, much more folk than psych.
>
>
>>dmh
>
> me there. IMHO, Rubber Soul is Folk Psych like say, Mr. Tamborine Man.
> So I should say with confidence that it is my belief that Rubber Soul
> is definitely Psychedelic, albeit Folk Psych (
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.music.beatles/msg/9f8569286d006fcf?hl=en&
> ). Since the Psych is of the lite variety, some may not even put it in
> this category, However, as mentioned elsewhere, Cannabis is a
> psychedelic. And I think we can agree Rubber Soul, if nothing more, is
> one of the greatest stoner albums of all time! Can I get an AMEN!
>
>
>>I'd say the Byrds were folk or they were psych, but rarely if ever both at
>>the same time. To put that in context, I wouldn't call Rubber Soul folk at
>>all. The Byrd were folk-rock because they played traditional material and
>>used instrumental techniques from folk music. Rubber Soul just had a lot
>>of
>>acoustic guitars on it.
>
> Acoustic's. Therefor I like to believe Rubber Soul was a more
> Contemporary Folk.
Eddie Lang and Django Reinhardt played acoustics, too. Does that make Rubber
Soul a jazz album?
An advancement, if you will, from John's vision of
> what he took from Bob Dylan's "traditional" Folk (if you can even
> consider Bob Dylans Folk traditional since he basically reinvented
> political and social Folk). Anyway, maybe you can agree that Rubber
> Soul is like a diamond and has many facets.
>
Actually, I prefer A Hard Day's Night.
Dale Houstman
Dyslexia or datlexia: it's all the same to me!
dmh
Dale Houstman
Rev. Love wrote:
> What about the Holy Modal Rounders? I would say that their peers at the
> time consider them the first Psych artists of the sixties. And they
> were also FOLK!
>
Good choice. I was about to mention them myself, but thought it would
confuse an already bogged-down conversation.
How about Yma Sumac? Or Lord Baltimore? Or all that oddly ugly music on
the Ernie Kovacs show? Blew my mind when I was a kid...
dmh
Dale Houstman
poisoned rose wrote:
> Dale Houstman <dm...@skypoint.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Just because Dylan didn't "own up" to doing
>>psychedelics does not constitute a valid reason to claim his early
>>albums aren't psychedelic.
>
>
> Personally, I don't think you can call any album "psychedelic,"
> purely on the basis of lyrics. And there isn't *any* Dylan song
> which I'd call psychedelic based on its music.
None I would either. But I beg to differ on the first statement. But -
as I said - the entire "genre" of psychedelic music is fairly vague. But
I do - strongly - think that - given the definition of "psychedelic" as
being "imitating or stimulating a drug or trance-like state" - a lot of
Dylan's early work is definitely psychedelic. But I'm still insisting
that the GumBallistics had the first truly psychedelic album ("Dreams
Made Of Money And The Pink Sweat Of A Drowning Porcupine Vol 1" not to
be confused with "Dreams Made Of Money And The Pink Sweat Of A Drowning
Porcupine Vol 2" which is strictly a klezmer-tango hybrid created by the
surviving members after three of their group were killed in a freak
refrigerator accident in 1956), and that - if one listens very carefully
- you can hear backwards guitar on most of Doris Day's recordings.
dmh
Dale Houstman
How about this lyric (from the GumBallistics' "Tweed Rainbow Halibut"
recorded in 1954!)...
"...grunting skyscrapers tickle the torquemada grasshoppers
as Lydia Lightbulb trembles biomorphic silhouettes into my pastel hair."
dmh
Dale Houstman
BlackMonk wrote:
> "Dale Houstman" <dm...@skypoint.com> wrote in message
> news:4451F471...@skypoint.com...
>
>>
>>BlackMonk wrote:
>>
>>>"Dale Houstman" <dm...@skypoint.com> wrote in message
>>>news:44518676...@skypoint.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Rev. Love wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Rubber Soul is definitely Psychedelic. Albeit Folk Psych. Same with the
>>>>>Byrds.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>To each their own of course, but I'd say the "definitely" is overstating
>>>>the case, especially as it seems NOT to be obvious to many of us.
>>>>"Norweigian Wood" yes, "The Word" to a certain degree, but that's about
>>>>it. The Byrds were "folk psych" but their first album or so was more like
>>>>Rubber Soul, much more folk than psych.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>I'd say the Byrds were folk or they were psych, but rarely if ever both
>>>at the same time. To put that in context, I wouldn't call Rubber Soul
>>>folk at all. The Byrd were folk-rock because they played traditional
>>>material and used instrumental techniques from folk music. Rubber Soul
>>>just had a lot of acoustic guitars on it.
>>
>>I must admit that I think you're a bit incorrect here: folk music pervades
>>the Byrds work from top to bottom, psychedelic or otherwise.
>
>
> I wouldn't say EVERYTHING. (Mind Gardens? Everybody's Been Burned? CTA 102?)
Yep. What I meant to say is that folk music is a continuous thread in
their work from beginning to end - not every song. And that includes
songs many consider "psychedelic." And surely the Jefferson Airplane
demonstrate that folk music structures and psychedelia mix fairly easily.
>
> In
>
>>the States, folk music is one of the defining sources of all music, and
>>(ala Jefferson Airplane) this influence is seen throughout the Byrds
>>psychedelic efforts. 60s American rock was thick with folk.
>
>
> Depends what you're listening to. Folk was a big influence on the San
> Francisco hippie bands. Not so much on The Beach Boys (Sloop John B
> notwithstanding), The Velvet Underground, or the Paul Butterfield Blues
> Band.
This gets down to definition, and I'm sorta tired of trying to pin down
what is basically a very slippery term. But I must say that the VU have
a lot of folk elements. And the distinction between folk and blues is as
all that distinct. But - whatever...as "the kids" say.
I saw the Paul Buuterfield Blues Band (in a Catholic high school
auditorium...same place I saw the Airplane) and it was some show! Every
few minutes one of the band members would walk off stage, and return in
a cloud of smoke. It kept the nuns awake.
>
>
> And the
>
>>Byrds aren't folk just because they use traditional material and
>>traditional instrumentation: folk is about song structures, vocal
>>approach, and subject matter also, and you can hear that in their
>>psychedelic work.
>
>
> You have a point here.
I was wondering where I left it!
>
> The thing about Dylan is that I really think a lot of the time he's
> misclassified as a folk artist, at least after he went electric. There isn't
> much folk music on Highway 61, for instance. He was a rock artist who
> started out performing folk music.
>
Even he insists on this, and I think that's right. Of course - again -
it's all about definitions. Folk purists of the time insisted that Bob
wasn't a folk artist - even when he was writing folk-structure songs -
because he wasn't doing enough "archival" work, but was writing new
songs. Personally I thought that was stupid then and stupid now. But
Louis Armstrong had it right when he was asked if what he did was folk
music, and claimed that of course, since he did it for folks.
dmh
Dale Houstman
poisoned rose wrote:
> "Lookingglass" <Shem...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>>>>>Personally, I don't think you can call any album "psychedelic,"
>>>>>purely on the basis of lyrics. And there isn't *any* Dylan song
>>>>>which I'd call psychedelic based on its music.
>>>>
>>>>"...take me on a trip upon your magic swirling ship..."
>>>>
>>>>...sounds psychedelic to me... ;^)
>>>
>>>As I said above....
>>
>>...the song is a whole... complete... lyric and music... as conceived by
>>Dylan...
>
>
> This... is... not... a... salient... comment... I'm... sure...
> you... can... guess... how... far... Dylan's... eyes... roll...
> if... he's... asked... whether... the... song... is...
> "psychedelic"...
He'd probably have you bumped off!
It's obvious that the notion of "psychedelic" is a tenuous beast...
dmh
Dale Houstman
It's not really "old timey music." They incorporate many strange things
into the mix that Grandpa Willy and the Back Porch Fiddlers would not
understand in the least.
dmh
DanKaye
>Here..if you go with the Ronders what about:
>
>THE FIRST PSYCHEDELIC LP - ALAN WATTS' "THIS IS IT"
>
>Contrary to what one might read, psychedelia didn't begin in 1966, and
>it wasn't invented by the Beatles or Timothy Leary. Psychedelic
>research and psychedelic culture had already existed for decades,
>unknown to most except an esoteric jet-set of researchers, artists and
>philosophers travelling along the London - Boston/N Y - California
>axis. The atmosphere could be described as academic-bohemian,
>incarnated in a few super-educated anglosaxons such as Gerald Heard and
>Aldous Huxley. These men had the intellectual resources to incorporate
>the mescaline and LSD experience into their already vast knowledge of
>Western and Eastern thought, and rather than jolting them out of their
>tracks it gave them concrete evidence and renewed energy.
>
>Expatriate Englishman Alan Watts was already famous in California as an
>eloquent lecturer and freewheeling thinker when he joined this
>aristocratic gang of quiet revolutionaries, many of which he knew from
>Oxbridge/Ivy League circles.....
>
>"This Is IT" is an extraordinary album on every level; it must be taken
>into account in any serious chronicle of psychedelia. Even now, the
>album appears highly advanced and challenging, its intensity certain to
>surprise those expecting some bongo-beating beatniks mumbling about
>nirvana. Timelessness, courage and a sense of absolute freedom makes it
>a truly essential experience. The fact that it was created by one of
>the portal figures of the mid-century's spiritual revolution is just
>one aspect of its importance and appeal.
Interesting. I became aware of the book, The Joyous Cosmology in 1971,
and did not realize it had been published years earlier. I still have
my copy, and it has some of the trippiest photos ever, but all are
macro or micro shots of natural objects and processes. I remember once
studying this book on lsd and it was quite mind expanding. Interesting
that this topic came up here, as I just ran into this book in my
closet the other day and took a short stroll through memory lane while
looking through it.
I later read a book by Watts called Pshycotherapy East and West which
was about the different approaches of psychotherapy taken by the two
cultures, as I recall and this was my first exposure to Eastern
thought.
By the way, the record is not rare, at least not in cd form. It's
available at amazon.com. Though one of the reviews describes it as
"noise" and "garbage", I'd like to hear it and judge for myself. You
can buy it here:
http://tinyurl.com/l8khg
However, I go back to an earlier argument I made about naming "the
first psychedelic album": that is, If a tree falls in the forest, and
no one is there to hear it, does it make any noise?
Okay, so it does make noise, but it doesn't have much effect on
anything.
I would classify this Watts album along with all those more or less
insignificant bands that made some psychedelic music in the early 60's
but hardly anyone heard:
if no one heard it, it can't really have much of an effect.
That is why I have to vote for Rubber Soul as the first psychedelic
album, because it had a MAJOR effect on individuals and on the rock n
roll subculture.
Olom...@aol.com
insignificant bands that made some psychedelic music in the early 60's
but hardly anyone heard:
if no one heard it, it can't really have much of an effect.
That is why I have to vote for Rubber Soul as the first psychedelic
album, because it had a MAJOR effect on individuals and on the rock n
roll subculture. <<
Coalescence!
Dale Houstman
Rev. Love wrote:
>>But I do - strongly - think that - given the definition of "psychedelic" as
>>being "imitating or stimulating a drug or trance-like state"
>
>
> Agreed. Same can be said for Rubber Soul. As contemporary as it may
> have been, there is no way Rubber Soul is not Folk
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubber_Soul) and there is no way it is
> not Psych (http://www.connollyco.com/discography/beatles/rubber.html).
>
If it floats your dinghy, then it's your favorite water...
dmh
Dale Houstman
I tried to coalesce, but all I could manage was a small coagulation...
dmh
Lizz Holmans
wrote:
>
>
>I tried to coalesce, but all I could manage was a small coagulation...
Well, that was bleedingly obvious.
Lizz 'you clot!' Holmans
--
Rumpeta, rumpeta, rumpeta
Lookingglass
...are you baiting PR...? ;^)
dave (...can I bring my friend to tea...)
www.Shemakhan.com
aw...@hotmail.com
Olom...@aol.com schreef:
> Subtle, but very true.
> Late 1965.
>
> Give the word a chance to say
> That the word is just the way
> It's the word I'm thinking of
> And the only word is love
> It's so fine, It's sunshine
> It's the word, love
>
> Say the word,
> LOVE
Great album. but the true first psychedelic album will always be
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Psychedelic_Sounds_of_the_13th_Floor_Elevators
Do not forget it. Ever.
Dale Houstman
Lizz Holmans wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 07:33:18 -0500, Dale Houstman <dm...@skypoint.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>>I tried to coalesce, but all I could manage was a small coagulation...
>
>
> Well, that was bleedingly obvious.
>
Which recalls to me the GumBallistics' third regional hit: "Let's Get An
Embolism Together." Very danceable, but with just a small nip of
crippling despair (provided by the distorted bagpipes in the 40 minute
break). The single (a square brown disk released on the Carp Droppings
Label in 1953) is quite rare these days, but it can be heard on their
compilation "The Mortified Mangrove: 15 Rashers Of Depression And
Pseudo-Joy."
dmh
Dale Houstman
I wouldn't do that. I'm just "doin' ma thing" and hoping it doesn't
aggravate too many people. Anyway, all that suff about the Gumballistics
is 100% true. I'm surprised you haven't heard of them. And you call
yourself a music lover!
Doris Day: the original Grace Slick!
dmh
Olom...@aol.com
Do not forget it. Ever. <<
How can we? The "It's a Lost Classic, Let's Rescue It from Obscurity
and Pronounce it a Groundbreaking Masterpiece!!" Have been yelling
this for decades... Sheesh.
Roky and Co are months behind Dylan, The Beatles, The Byrds and Zappa.
Yeah it may be the first lp to use the word "psychedelic" in its title
and the production has all the super cheese associated with teen-age
biker B-Movie bummers but the reality is that the Elevators just point
up the sophisticated trippiness of the earlier Beatles and Dylan discs.
BlackMonk
>
>
> BlackMonk wrote:
> Yep. What I meant to say is that folk music is a continuous thread in
> their work from beginning to end - not every song. And that includes songs
> many consider "psychedelic." And surely the Jefferson Airplane demonstrate
> that folk music structures and psychedelia mix fairly easily.
>
How so? I'm not too familiar with their music beyond a couple of albums.
>>
>> In
>>
>>>the States, folk music is one of the defining sources of all music, and
>>>(ala Jefferson Airplane) this influence is seen throughout the Byrds
>>>psychedelic efforts. 60s American rock was thick with folk.
>>
>>
>> Depends what you're listening to. Folk was a big influence on the San
>> Francisco hippie bands. Not so much on The Beach Boys (Sloop John B
>> notwithstanding), The Velvet Underground, or the Paul Butterfield Blues
>> Band.
>
> This gets down to definition, and I'm sorta tired of trying to pin down
> what is basically a very slippery term. But I must say that the VU have a
> lot of folk elements. And the distinction between folk and blues is as all
> that distinct. But - whatever...as "the kids" say.
>
> I saw the Paul Buuterfield Blues Band (in a Catholic high school
> auditorium...same place I saw the Airplane) and it was some show! Every
> few minutes one of the band members would walk off stage, and return in a
> cloud of smoke. It kept the nuns awake.
>
I just got a pretty incredible recording from 1966, just pre-East-West,
post-Sam Lay, and they'd be in the running for best live band of the
sixties. Incredibly tight, and Bloomfield was just about the best guitarist
in rock.
>>
>> The thing about Dylan is that I really think a lot of the time he's
>> misclassified as a folk artist, at least after he went electric. There
>> isn't much folk music on Highway 61, for instance. He was a rock artist
>> who started out performing folk music.
>>
>
> Even he insists on this, and I think that's right. Of course - again -
> it's all about definitions. Folk purists of the time insisted that Bob
> wasn't a folk artist - even when he was writing folk-structure songs -
> because he wasn't doing enough "archival" work, but was writing new songs.
That's the problem with all such labels. Either they're too restictive, so
that they only apply to an excessively pure conception of what the music is
and leave no room for innovation, or they're so broad that they convey no
information at all. In most large record stores, the folk section is mainly
singer/songwriters who have little connection with folk music. My
description when I worked retail was "anyone who owns an acoustic guitar,
but not a cowboy hat."
BlackMonk
> >Eddie Lang and Django Reinhardt played acoustics, too. Does that make
> >Rubber
>>Soul a jazz album?
>
> folk had to be contained within the limits of acoustic guitars. You
> reply wasn't warranted.
>
Yes, me reply was warrented. You made a weak point and the weak point I was
replying to wasn't the one you suggest I was replying to. I know you didn't
say folk had to be contained within the limits of acoustic guitars. You
suggested that the use of acoustic guitars made Rubber Soul folk. Tain't
necessarily so, as folk doesn't circumscribe all uses of acoustic guitars.
Dale Houstman
Well it's YOUR reality for sure. to me, Roky and company bring a new
element to the psychedelic mix, one of a certain Texas ferocity that
surfaces later in such acts as The Butthole Surfers, albeit with less
sleaze. That "biker film cheese" sounds magnficent to my ears, and Roky
is a very interesting lyricist, with all too real paranoid/psychotic
colorings that Dylan and the Beatles couldn't touch. All to the better -
mental health wise - of course. Roky (especially on his "Aliens"
recording with such luxuries as "I Walked With a Zombie" (the greatest
bad date song of all time!) and "Bloody Hammer" demonstrates a "broken
syntax" that reminds one of Syd Barrett - for a very good reason as it
turns out.
dmh
Dale Houstman
BlackMonk wrote:
> "Dale Houstman" <dm...@skypoint.com> wrote in message
> news:4452FAF7...@skypoint.com...
>
>>
>>BlackMonk wrote:
>>Yep. What I meant to say is that folk music is a continuous thread in
>>their work from beginning to end - not every song. And that includes songs
>>many consider "psychedelic." And surely the Jefferson Airplane demonstrate
>>that folk music structures and psychedelia mix fairly easily.
>>
>
>
> How so? I'm not too familiar with their music beyond a couple of albums.
Well- they arose from the folk scene - their first album (absent the
great Grace) is more a folk album than a psychedelic one. And throughout
their recording history, folk structures continue to be present. For
instance - on "Volunteers" - they have a song called "Good Shepherd"
which is almost a straight bit of folkways. And their narrative songs
(such as "Lather" on Crown of Creation) sound both psychedelic and folk.
>
>
>
>>>In
>>>
>>>
>>>>the States, folk music is one of the defining sources of all music, and
>>>>(ala Jefferson Airplane) this influence is seen throughout the Byrds
>>>>psychedelic efforts. 60s American rock was thick with folk.
>>>
>>>
>>>Depends what you're listening to. Folk was a big influence on the San
>>>Francisco hippie bands. Not so much on The Beach Boys (Sloop John B
>>>notwithstanding), The Velvet Underground, or the Paul Butterfield Blues
>>>Band.
>>
>>This gets down to definition, and I'm sorta tired of trying to pin down
>>what is basically a very slippery term. But I must say that the VU have a
>>lot of folk elements. And the distinction between folk and blues is as all
>>that distinct. But - whatever...as "the kids" say.
>>
>>I saw the Paul Buuterfield Blues Band (in a Catholic high school
>>auditorium...same place I saw the Airplane) and it was some show! Every
>>few minutes one of the band members would walk off stage, and return in a
>>cloud of smoke. It kept the nuns awake.
>>
>
>
> I just got a pretty incredible recording from 1966, just pre-East-West,
> post-Sam Lay, and they'd be in the running for best live band of the
> sixties. Incredibly tight, and Bloomfield was just about the best guitarist
> in rock.
It was a great show. As you say - very tight, although they were all
quite high by the third song or so. They had the harmonica player James
Cotton with them, and he was fantastic. They were playing on a level
floor - not a raised stage - and were only a few feet from me. It was a
really fine evening.
>
>
>
>>>The thing about Dylan is that I really think a lot of the time he's
>>>misclassified as a folk artist, at least after he went electric. There
>>>isn't much folk music on Highway 61, for instance. He was a rock artist
>>>who started out performing folk music.
>>>
>>
>>Even he insists on this, and I think that's right. Of course - again -
>>it's all about definitions. Folk purists of the time insisted that Bob
>>wasn't a folk artist - even when he was writing folk-structure songs -
>>because he wasn't doing enough "archival" work, but was writing new songs.
>
>
> That's the problem with all such labels. Either they're too restictive, so
> that they only apply to an excessively pure conception of what the music is
> and leave no room for innovation, or they're so broad that they convey no
> information at all. In most large record stores, the folk section is mainly
> singer/songwriters who have little connection with folk music. My
> description when I worked retail was "anyone who owns an acoustic guitar,
> but not a cowboy hat."
Even that's a little restrictive probably. In general you're correct.
These labels eventually don't mean much, especially as music continues
to be "thinkin' of linkin'" with other music. I think "psychedelic" is
essentially a relatively useless descriptive phrase, although certain
musical "effects" (backwards guitar, excessive echo, etc.) are easily
identified with the genre. But that hasn't stopped me from having a
separate psychedelic section in my music collection, which reeks of
folk, country, jazz and classical influences, amongst other things. The
designations make little difference. "I Just Dropped In To See What
Condition My Condition Was In" is psychedelic, but it's also cynical
corporate tripe. You slow a rock song down enough and it's a blues. Add
a twang to your voice and it's a country song. We're living in a mutable
world.
dmh
>
>
BlackMonk
> >Yes, me reply was warrented. You made a weak point and the weak point I
> >was
>>replying to wasn't the one you suggest I was replying to. I know you
>>didn't
>>say folk had to be contained within the limits of acoustic guitars. You
>>suggested that the use of acoustic guitars made Rubber Soul folk. Tain't
>>necessarily so, as folk doesn't circumscribe all uses of acoustic guitars.
>
> Rubber Soul was folk due to Acoustic Guitars.
This is the first time you asked that. Previously, you asked the opposite.
If you were to follow
> along with the conversation, it was mentioned by a different poster
> that acoustic guitars were an element of the folk genre. A very
> important element that it just so happens Rubber Soul does display.
Again, lots of things that aren't folk also use acoustic guitars, so the
fact that Rubber Soul has them doesn't make it folk.
So,
> I must request, keep your irrelevant attempts at a reply to yourself.
How is saying something ON TOPIC irrelevant?
I
> don;t understand were your point lies anyway. I bet you agree with me
> that Rubber Soul is Folk Psych record but you just want to be a tough
> guy. Save yourself the trouble as I do not get involved in trivial
> displays of primitive behavior such as that, MATE.
>
I'm not your mate and I would never call it either folk or psyche.
BlackMonk
>
>
> BlackMonk wrote:
>> "Dale Houstman" <dm...@skypoint.com> wrote in message
>> news:4452FAF7...@skypoint.com...
>>
>>>
>>>BlackMonk wrote:
>>>Yep. What I meant to say is that folk music is a continuous thread in
>>>their work from beginning to end - not every song. And that includes
>>>songs many consider "psychedelic." And surely the Jefferson Airplane
>>>demonstrate that folk music structures and psychedelia mix fairly easily.
>>>
>>
>>
>> How so? I'm not too familiar with their music beyond a couple of albums.
>
> Well- they arose from the folk scene - their first album (absent the great
> Grace) is more a folk album than a psychedelic one.
That doesn't mean they're mixing the two, just that they played folk at one
point and psychedlia at another.
And throughout
> their recording history, folk structures continue to be present. For
> instance - on "Volunteers" - they have a song called "Good Shepherd" which
> is almost a straight bit of folkways. And their narrative songs (such as
> "Lather" on Crown of Creation) sound both psychedelic and folk.
>
What is a folk structure as opposed to a blues, country, or pop structure?
Dale Houstman
BlackMonk wrote:
> "Dale Houstman" <dm...@skypoint.com> wrote in message
> news:44544C10...@skypoint.com...
>
>>
>> BlackMonk wrote:
>>
>>> "Dale Houstman" <dm...@skypoint.com> wrote in message
>>> news:4452FAF7...@skypoint.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>> BlackMonk wrote: Yep. What I meant to say is that folk music is
>>>> a continuous thread in their work from beginning to end - not
>>>> every song. And that includes songs many consider
>>>> "psychedelic." And surely the Jefferson Airplane demonstrate
>>>> that folk music structures and psychedelia mix fairly easily.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> How so? I'm not too familiar with their music beyond a couple of
>>> albums.
>>
>> Well- they arose from the folk scene - their first album (absent
>> the great Grace) is more a folk album than a psychedelic one.
>
>
> That doesn't mean they're mixing the two, just that they played folk
> at one point and psychedlia at another.
Sigh: a purist statement. They DO mix the genres, and one grows out of
the other. Music isn't a set of office cubicles. Folk music informs ALL
of the Airplane's albums. It's rather obvious.
>
>
> And throughout
>
>> their recording history, folk structures continue to be present.
>> For instance - on "Volunteers" - they have a song called "Good
>> Shepherd" which is almost a straight bit of folkways. And their
>> narrative songs (such as "Lather" on Crown of Creation) sound both
>> psychedelic and folk.
>>
>
>
> What is a folk structure as opposed to a blues, country, or pop
> structure?
Well - if (as you're implying) there is no difference, then you are
admitting that all these groups did indeed mix psychedelic and folk
music. Unless you think psychedelic music is a completely distinct
musical form from all the ones mentioned - which is bizarre. I'm the
first to admit that there are very few differences: that's sort of my
point. I'm only arguing for the presence of folk elements in psychedelic
music because you appear to think they simply cannot show up in the same
song, which is ridiculous at best. But - not being a musical professor -
there are disitinctive narrative structures in folk (the "Roland My Son"
form of Dylan's "Hard Rain" for instance), but - as I say - country rock
and folk all share a common monkey background. There are other
differences; blues uses more sevenths, more bent notes, rock - well -
rocks. Pop music is the great Hoover of form: it essentially exists to
"cannibalize" all other forms in its drive to create a popular piece of
music for the market. So - of course - one will find pop songs that are
essentially blues (The Stones e.g.), others that are essentially folk
(Donovan and some Dylan e.g.), others that derive from country, and even
ones that dabble in jazz (Gershwin, Ellington, Sinatra, and the idea of
extended improvs), and classical touches (as in symphonic rock and the
Bach touches of Procul Harum,etc.). Not to mention Indian and Celtic and
Arabic music. Pop music usually simplifies and clarifies the forms,
trying to appeal to the widest audience. Stephen Foster took a lot of
basically black music and turned it into popular song. There is no
derogatory aspect to this: pop music has a grand history. So - of
course- there is no easy answer. Just as to imply that psychedelic songs
are rigidly separated from folk songs by such artists as The Airplane.
Tain't so, and it would be exceedingly odd if it were.
I'm going into the listening room and play my collection of
GumBallistics records. They knew how to mix it up.
dmh
Lookingglass
> Dale,
>
> I'm not of any significant position to have license to build one's
> psyche' up, but I do believe you possess quite a brain there!
>
> Too many words though. You could've said it without being so
> loquacious! j/k
...you could have said he's "chatty" without using that word... you know...
loquacious.
;^) ..................
dave (...words of love...)
www.Shemakhan.com
BlackMonk
> >How is saying something ON TOPIC irrelevant?
>
> Just for the sake of an argument. Seriously guy, you are not very smart
> and I will now cease speaking to you. Thanks for nothing.
>
Wow, you're really a jerk. Most people, when they see a misattributed line,
which seems to be your problem, though you took two posts to make that
anything close to clear, assume it was a mistake. You're using it to pick a
usenet fight.
Let me know when you get out of those awkward pubescent years.
BlackMonk
>
>
> BlackMonk wrote:
> > "Dale Houstman" <dm...@skypoint.com> wrote in message
> > news:44544C10...@skypoint.com...
> >
> >>
> >> BlackMonk wrote:
> >>
> >>> "Dale Houstman" <dm...@skypoint.com> wrote in message
> >>> news:4452FAF7...@skypoint.com...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> BlackMonk wrote: Yep. What I meant to say is that folk music is
> >>>> a continuous thread in their work from beginning to end - not
> >>>> every song. And that includes songs many consider
> >>>> "psychedelic." And surely the Jefferson Airplane demonstrate
> >>>> that folk music structures and psychedelia mix fairly easily.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> How so? I'm not too familiar with their music beyond a couple of
> >>> albums.
> >>
> >> Well- they arose from the folk scene - their first album (absent
> >> the great Grace) is more a folk album than a psychedelic one.
> >
> >
> > That doesn't mean they're mixing the two, just that they played folk
> > at one point and psychedlia at another.
>
> Sigh: a purist statement. They DO mix the genres, and one grows out of
> of the Airplane's albums. It's rather obvious.
>
Don't be a jerk. I asked you how they mix the genres. Simply repeating that
they do says nothing, no matter how many capitals you use.
> >
> >
> > And throughout
> >
> >> their recording history, folk structures continue to be present.
> >> For instance - on "Volunteers" - they have a song called "Good
> >> Shepherd" which is almost a straight bit of folkways. And their
> >> narrative songs (such as "Lather" on Crown of Creation) sound both
> >> psychedelic and folk.
> >>
> >
> >
> > What is a folk structure as opposed to a blues, country, or pop
> > structure?
>
> Well - if (as you're implying) there is no difference, then you are
> admitting that all these groups did indeed mix psychedelic and folk music.
I'm not implying anything. I asked a simple question.
Unless you think psychedelic music is a completely distinct
> musical form from all the ones mentioned - which is bizarre. I'm the first
> to admit that there are very few differences: that's sort of my point. I'm
> only arguing for the presence of folk elements in psychedelic music
> because you appear to think they simply cannot show up in the same song,
"Did not" and "can not" are two different things.
which is ridiculous at best. But - not being a musical professor -
> there are disitinctive narrative structures in folk (the "Roland My Son"
> form of Dylan's "Hard Rain" for instance), but - as I say - country rock
> and folk all share a common monkey background.
I see. You were talking about lyrical forms. I thought you meant musical
structures.
> Just as to imply that psychedelic songs are rigidly separated from folk
> songs by such artists as The Airplane. Tain't so, and it would be
> exceedingly odd if it were.
>
Again, I never said it was impossible to mix folk and psychedelia. I agreed
with you about some Byrds songs and I'd argue that John Fahey was brilliant
at it. I just don't hear it in a lot of Jefferson Airplane. Or on Rubber
Soul, for that matter.
BlackMonk
> Ah, now you are resorting to name calling. I don't want to start a
> fight, but I will allow no one to try and tell me what I said or what I
> meant to say. It only took two post for you.
>
I'm resorting to name calling? I notice you snipped all context to hide
where you said things like "you are not very smart." Kind of like when you
acussed me of putting words in your mouth while at the same time claiming I
really agreed with you about Rubber Soul despite the fact that I said I
didn't.
Incidently, I thought you were going cease speaking to me. Please try to
keep your word.
Lookingglass
"poisoned rose" <closeupthe...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:z5b5g.64181$_S7....@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
> "BlackMonk" <Blac...@email.msn.com> wrote:
>
>> > Sigh: a purist statement. They DO mix the genres, and one grows out of
>> > the other.Music isn't a set of office cubicles. Folk music informs ALL
>> > of the Airplane's albums. It's rather obvious.
>>
>> Don't be a jerk. I asked you how they mix the genres. Simply repeating
>> that
>> they do says nothing, no matter how many capitals you use.
>
> to presume one of them was Surrealistic Pillow...you didn't hear any
> folk flavor in, say, "Embyronic Journey," "How Do You Feel," "Today"
> and "Comin' Back to Me"?
>
> They covered Donovan, Youngbloods, David Crosby and Fred Neil
> songs...their vocal harmonies are heavily in a folk style...the
> lyrics often have a folk-protest flavor...leader Marty Balin had a
> folk background, and even co-ran a folk-rock club called the Matrix
> prior to Airplane's breakthrough....
>
> Some other notable Airplane tracks with strong folk underpinnings:
> "Martha," "Come Up the Years," "Lather," "The Ballad of You & Me &
> Pooneil" ("Pooneil" is another reference to Fred Neil)," "Won't You
> Try/Saturday Afternoon" and "Third Week in the Chelsea."
>
> Seems like the folk element is hard to miss, and very commonly
> observed. Try a few soundclips on the Web?
...what do you think of BLOWS AGAINST THE EMPIRE... ?
dave (...and our friends are all aboard...)
www.Shemakhan.com
Lookingglass
> "Lookingglass" <Shem...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> ...what do you think of BLOWS AGAINST THE EMPIRE... ?
>
> That was about the point where the Airplane gang's ability to create
> a good "sound" started to shame their thinning ability to write a
> good *song*.
>
> On the other hand, I still have Long John Silver, heaven knows why.
> Possibly the worst 1970s album which I still deign to keep around.
...not even HAVE YOU SEEN THE STARS TONIGHT...?
dave (...as they make their way across the universe...)
abe slaney
>
> On the other hand, I still have Long John Silver, heaven knows why.
Probably for "Trial By Fire" - the rest is pretty awful.
BlackMonk
> "BlackMonk" <Blac...@email.msn.com> wrote:
>
>> > Sigh: a purist statement. They DO mix the genres, and one grows out of
>> > the other.Music isn't a set of office cubicles. Folk music informs ALL
>> > of the Airplane's albums. It's rather obvious.
>>
>> Don't be a jerk. I asked you how they mix the genres. Simply repeating
>> that
>> they do says nothing, no matter how many capitals you use.
>
> to presume one of them was Surrealistic Pillow...you didn't hear any
> folk flavor in, say, "Embyronic Journey," "How Do You Feel," "Today"
> and "Comin' Back to Me"?
>
I don't hear psychedelia in two of them, don't really remember the other
two.
> They covered Donovan, Youngbloods, David Crosby and Fred Neil
> songs
I wouldn"t call Get Together psychedelic or Wooden Ships folk. I'm talking
about musical elements here, not pedigrees. Covering a song written by
someone who covered folk songs is a step removed from being a folk-psyche
fusion.
...their vocal harmonies are heavily in a folk style
If that's true, and it is sometimes, though not always, that's what I'm
looking for.
...the
> lyrics often have a folk-protest flavor...leader Marty Balin had a
> folk background, and even co-ran a folk-rock club called the Matrix
> prior to Airplane's breakthrough....
>
Again, I'm talking about musical elements of their songs. I'm perfectly
aware of their biographies.
> Some other notable Airplane tracks with strong folk underpinnings:
> "Martha," "Come Up the Years," "Lather," "The Ballad of You & Me &
> Pooneil" ("Pooneil" is another reference to Fred Neil)," "Won't You
> Try/Saturday Afternoon" and "Third Week in the Chelsea."
>
> Seems like the folk element is hard to miss, and very commonly
> observed. Try a few soundclips on the Web?
Reread this thread. I didn't deny that some of their songs had a folk
influence. I said that their more psychedelic songs aren't necessarily the
ones that had a folk influence.
Incidently, what do you hear that makes Won't You Try Saturday Afternoon
notable for being a folk song?
Dale Houstman
Lookingglass wrote:
> "Rev. Love" <beat...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1146423048.1...@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
>>Dale,
>>
>>I'm not of any significant position to have license to build one's
>>psyche' up, but I do believe you possess quite a brain there!
>>
>>Too many words though. You could've said it without being so
>>loquacious! j/k
>
>
>
> ...you could have said he's "chatty" without using that word... you know...
> loquacious.
>
From the International Lexiconagrammicon:
"loquacious: gassy, with a slight hint of cheap perfume which clings to
one's clothing long after any real affection has died in an unfortunate
waterskiing accident."
That's me!
dmh
Dale Houstman
Rev. Love wrote:
> Dale,
>
> I'm not of any significant position to have license to build one's
> psyche' up, but I do believe you possess quite a brain there!
>
> Too many words though. You could've said it without being so
> loquacious! j/k
>
Like this...
U B rong. Mee rite. Moosick rawks!
dmh
Dale Houstman
BlackMonk wrote:
>>
>
>
> Don't be a jerk.
Why not? It seems a common enough thing to do...
>I asked you how they mix the genres. Simply repeating that
> they do says nothing, no matter how many capitals you use.
Well - the fact is I DID already describe this mixing quite adequately
enough, but the fact remains you simply refuse to believe it. I don't
really know how to convince someone so set on believing the absurd: that
a band went to the trouble of keeping all its genres separated for some
daffy reason. Try singing "White Rabbit" (a definite psychedlic song)
slowly and acoustically: that's a folk song! At any rate you've already
conceded the argument yourself when you implied that there are no
differences between all the genres, so how COULD they keep them
willfully separate? They covered Donovan on "Bless Its Pointed Little
Head" for Leary's sake! And that's a psychedelic tune also, as is much
of Donovan's work of the time. You're just being a mule about this, and
- frankly - you are neither interesting or intelligent enough to pursue
any further conversation with. If you want to believe that a musical
group purposely went to the trouble of separating genres you already
said are inseparable, be my guest.
By the way: i capitalized one word for a reasonable emphasis, so your
complaint in that area strikes me as - well - jerkish.
> Again, I never said it was impossible to mix folk and psychedelia.
no: you actually said that there exists no difference between the
structures of folk and blues and pop. If so, how could they be separated?
>I agreed
> with you about some Byrds songs and I'd argue that John Fahey was brilliant
> at it. I just don't hear it in a lot of Jefferson Airplane. Or on Rubber
> Soul, for that matter.
If you don't hear it, then no amount of talk will convince your tin
ears. Or maybe they're merely zinc?
dmh
>
>
Lookingglass
...I feel your pain... ;^)
dave (...say the word you're thinking of...)
www.Shemakhan.com
DanKaye
>Depends what you're listening to. Folk was a big influence on the San
>Francisco hippie bands. Not so much on The Beach Boys (Sloop John B
>notwithstanding), The Velvet Underground, or the Paul Butterfield Blues
>Band.
>
playing at a Folk House, and had problems with the owner because they
wanted to go electric.
>And the
>> Byrds aren't folk just because they use traditional material and
>> traditional instrumentation: folk is about song structures, vocal
>> approach, and subject matter also, and you can hear that in their
>> psychedelic work.
>
Turn! Turn! Turn! is about as "folk" as you can get, structurally, no?
Dale Houstman
Certainly, but Blackmonk will insist - because it is folk - that it can
thus not be psychedelic. It's a strange little axiom that precludes
using one's ears.
dmh
Dale Houstman
Rev. Love wrote:
>>Certainly, but Blackmonk will insist - because it is folk - that it can
>>thus not be psychedelic. It's a strange little axiom that precludes
>>using one's ears.
>>
>>dmh
>
>
>
> Axiom and Precludes! No name callin!
>
Axiom and Precludes went to a little ball
Axiom told Precludes that it's simple all in all
"What's right is right and that is that"
Then promptly disembowelled a cat
Who dared to suggest Precludes was too tall.
Precludes then insisted there's no fun
In eating muffins when they're just called "buns"
Axiom was muddled, he'd never heard it said
That ears belong with noses and eyeballs on the head
Then quickly set his tinfoil hat to "stun."
dmh
Dale Houstman
Rev. Love wrote:
>> From the International Lexiconagrammicon:
>>
>>"loquacious: gassy, with a slight hint of cheap perfume which clings to
>>one's clothing long after any real affection has died in an unfortunate
>>waterskiing accident."
>>
>>That's me!
>>
>>dmh
>
>
> MY! MY! Lascivious!
>
A licentious libation
This quaff of liberation
This library of libel and of licorice
A liquid lilting lily pad
Lifted lunks and logy lads
To look upon latescent Icarus.
O lonely logia!
O lissome Luxor!
O lithe and loamy loons!
Location! Location! Location!
dmh
Olom...@aol.com
Psych/Folk Duo that opened for Pearls Before Swine.
Dale Houstman
Rev. Love wrote:
> I'd say someone was hitting the libation all right ( as hard as I'm
> hitting this bong).
>
I do not drink (I think)
It would be very wrong
I'd rather take a nap
Or join you at the bong.
But Lydia (in Libya)
Gives license to lewd acts
A little like that Lorelei
Whose liberties are lax.
dmh