Apparently Neils is the 'Tim Rose" version. I haven’t listened yet.
My case is based not just on the musicology of it but that is was a huge popular phenomenon that is quite recognizable as happening many times over in the next 175 years. Has never stopped being so.
I read where Milt Gabler said that the Louis Jordan records he made were basically the same as Bill Haleys (Which he made) except for the heavy backbeat on the 2 for Bills.
For all we know the Egyptians, Greeks and Romans rocked out. While musical style is a reflection of a culture, I can see music turning to a hard, pounding, beat-driven model over and over again, probably while the village elders met to try and ban it.
Rock n’ roll is accented on the 2nd and 4th?
I thought it was on the first and 3rd, with the 3rd, especially, being HUGE.
But I acknowledge I don’t know a lot about music theory.
You think that the history of music is a precapitulation of what happened in the US? You’re welcome to give an example. (From recorded history though) We do know that drums were outlawed in the US for slaves.
You are surely aware that it’s estimated that 99% of formally-composed music is lost, since it was created in eras before meaningful recording or transcription methods. We have only the faintest idea what music sounded like before the Middle Ages, and a sketchy and incomplete record until modern music notation came into use around 1500(?)
I think it is entirely possible Greek audiences rocked out, BCE.
I don’t have a degree but I THINK rock is emphasis on the 2 and 4. Funk, and Reggae shift to the 1 and 3. There is a James Brown bio called “The One.” He was huge in making that shift obviously.
Milt was saying that Louis Jordan had a fairly evenly distributed beat of 4/4. Whereas Bills drummer pounded on the 2 and 4. And the kids tore it up.
I know professor, but if it happened through history there should be a good example to cite in “recorded” history.
If you want to believe that music in the vein of rock and roll only came into existence in the US some time after 1900, it’s certainly not challengeable.
However, thinking that all pre-recording music was Gregorian chant, Telemann and “Greensleeves” is probably a bit narrow.
Umm, I don’t think I said any of this.
I agree, there probably were musical rebels and heavy beats throughout human existence, though the two would not necessarily be identical.
That isn’t inconsistent with the OP though. I am making a historical premise going back to the 1840s, having to do with a definition of Rock and Roll, as an American popular mass culture phenomenon.
Yes, the accent is almost always on the 2 & 4 in rock. I mean, it’s the defining rhythm of rock. Look up “backbeat.” I have no idea where you get 3 being the big beat–it’s not a big beat in rock. Unless you’re counting in eighth notes, then what you call the “3” would be the “2”. (That is, instead of counting 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 &, you’re counting 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 or 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4). Basically, where is the snare falling when you’re counting a rock beat? It should be 2 & 4 for like 90%+ of songs. If it’s 3, then you’re counting differently than the standard way.
Funk does emphasize off beats (the “ands” of beats), but it does tend to all come back to the one. There’s a lot of off-beat, syncopated stuff in funk, but a lot of it comes back to tying everything back into the one. Reggae does odd stuff, too, most famous the “one drop.” Basically, a “one drop” is dropping the one beat, so where you expect that “one” to come in and ground you, it’s just ignored. So, the backbeat (two and four) are still emphasized, but where you expect a one and three kick, you lose the kick and accent on the one.