I don’t know what you mean exactly by “challenging”. My point is that Jerry Garcia’s vocals were not challenging. Neil Young and Bob Dylan’s vocals were challenging. They may have challenged ideas about what a singer’s voice “should” sound like, but they didn’t challenge the widely held idea that a singer’s voice had to be very distinctive, whether that distinction came from the fact that it was polished and clean, or gravelly/nasal/whiny. Trying to emulate the vocals of Dylan or Neil Young is literally challenging.
Jerry Garcia’s voice was just effortless, conversational, naturalistic-sounding, colloquial, however you want to put it - it just sounded like “friendly dude who’s telling you an entertaining/interesting story”. He wasn’t straining or grinding out every note with a gravelly tone, a high pitched wine, any kind of polished vibrato or falsetto - his voice just sounded like a dude’s voice.
That was just as influential on the course of music that followed, as Dylan and Young were. In a way, it was kinda punk rock, without the yelling or attitude.
The “jazz” in my “jazz rock” description of them and similar bands has more to due with the harmonic and melodic content of their music (and perhaps instrumentation, as well), rather than anything to do with an improvisatory nature. I think music can be “jazz” in sound without being strictly “jazz” in approach. Just like a lot of “blues rock” can be completely composed except for the solos, even though the blues shares the same improvository approach as jazz. There is no doubt in my mind that Steely Dan sounds like rock music composed and played by cats with jazz chops. What you’re thinking of is probably what I’d more call “jazz fusion.” There the emphasis is on the “jazz.” Jazz is the base genre. In jazz rock, at least how I use it, rock is the base genre.
A lot of jam band music can arguably be called “jazz in approach” but not “jazz in sound.” It’s not a coincidence that a number of jazz fusion musicians of the 70s and 80s later trickled down into the jam band scene, like John Scofield and Kenwood Dennard, and it’s not a coincidence that Trey Anastasio has acknowledged Pat Metheny as a major influence on his playing. You can hear the similarity in Metheny’s solo, for instance, on In France They Kiss On Main Street from Joni Mitchell’s Shadows and Light tour (also featuring a ridiculously good bass part by none other than Jaco Pastorius.)
Indeed, most of the time when I hear new music that displays superlative musicianship, it’s on Sirius XM’s “Jam On” channel. That’s where I first heard Vulfpeck, for instance, years before they hit it big.
I’m the wrong guy to discuss this with. I find Jerry Garcia’s vocals to be unlistenable. I don’t want to be cute or snarky or dismissive - the Dead’s success can’t be denied - but I don’t think any of them can sing a lick and I keep a far distance from their music.
Neil Young and Bob Dylan have challenging voices but their songs made it worth the effort for me to get past that.
OK, just listen to this song…China Cat Sunflower from my favorite live Dead recording, Veneta Oregon 1972. Don’t even listen to the vocals if ya don’t like Jerry’s voice, that’s fine. Just dig the bass part, it’s badass. Phil plays like a great jazz bassist sometimes, throwing in effortless syncopation without ever dropping the beat.
But you know, if you really don’t like the Dead at all…then I’m sorry, I can’t ever talk to you, I don’t want to have anything to do with you, I am going to remove you from my Friends list and put you on Ignore and write your name on a piece of paper and burn it. And then I’ll pour bong water on the ashes.
I would certainly agree with that, and even some of it flirts with jazz in sound. Like I particularly find Phish to have fairly jazzy edges to their music and oddball harmonies, almost like some sort of weird jazz-prog rock amalgam, but without the synthesizers. When I played in a jam band in college, it was very much “Ok, here’s our song: here’s some chords; here’s some basic melodic hooks; we’ll take turns improvising; here’s a few signals to help us communicate changes, moves to the next section of the song, etc.” In other words, 80% of the music was improvised, and sometimes even 100%. (We’d occasionally just jam a song out on the fly.) But the harmonic structures were much more rock-oriented, usually keeping with triads and dominant sevenths. (Though not always…we’d get jazzier at times.)
I saw them once, too, high as a kite and watching the pretty, spinning girls in their inverted-mushroom dresses, as the mellow music washed over me. It’s not really my thing; I’m more into hard-driving rock, something with an edge to it. But it was a very enjoyable experience.
Well, I’m 31, so I never saw them, but I do hope to catch Dead & Co. with John Mayer this summer. (I always thought Mayer was great, btw. But what I really would like to see someday is Pat Metheny in that lineup. I don’t even know how much he digs the Dead, but if they resurrected some of the Shadows and Light setlist, that would be my dream come true basically.)
I’ve always viewed jam band music to be America’s answer to Britain’s prog rock music, if that makes any sense. Prog, from its (arguable) origins with George Martin’s arrangements, through to Yes and King Crimson, Floyd, ELP, Genesis, Camel, and what have you, is sort of a British phenomenon, as I see it. I’d also include Roxy Music as part of that continuum, though they also threw in elements of glam.
The only British band that I view as being equivalent to the Grateful Dead, are Fairport Convention. And they also actually overlap with prog in numerous ways (sharing a bassist, Dave Pegg, with Jethro Tull, for instance.)
The American jam band scene that followed the Grateful Dead, Allman Bros. and numerous other influences, also drew from the best of American motown, funk, and jazz, in the same way that the British prog rockers drew from the grandiose baroque arrangements of European classical music.
Yep, that’s why I don’t try to spend a lot of time on the bands I don’t like: I am after good discussion, not alienating folks - and I would hate to have bongwater spilled on my name!!
So yeah, this song is nice. A cool gentle groove with, yes, a great role for the bass. Doesn’t blow me away - per your comments above, I would much rather listen to a small jazz combo playing songs out of the American Songbook to get my improv/jam needs met. And yeah, the vocals remain unlistenable. Around 1:15 in, there is a line delivered with harmony. I ripped the headphones out of my ears. God they can’t sing.
I grew up in the Bay Area but never sought the Dead out. My one concert was backstage passes at the Shoreline Amphitheater when Bruce Hornsby was touring on keyboards. Met Bill Walton backstage. Glad I did it, but ended up with the distinct impression that the Dead where a hired soundtrack for the audience’s overall sensory experience, not the focal point of a rock concert, per se. Absolutely nothing wrong with that, but it put what the Dead do in perspective for me. And no edge or danger, which I have already established is part of what I look for.
Like you say, there’s this weird division where there’s lots of famous British rock bands, and not so many famous British solo artists, while here in the U.S., it’s the other way around. Or is it?
Because we have plenty of these major-artist-and-permanent-backing-band combos, from Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band on down.
So what do we do with them, for purposes of this debate? The awkward thing about this thread is, it’s never really decided. Are they bands, or solo artists with permanent backup?
If we count Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band as a band, they blow away most of the names in this thread. (All of them, AFAIAC.)
If we don’t, then we also have to drop Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers, Bob Seger and the Silver Bullet Band, and all the other major-artist-and-permanent-backing-band combos.
But that’s where the debate gets interesting, of course. Hell, on those terms, I can’t even agree with myself for fifteen minutes at a stretch. There’s not a single dominant band left, hell, not even one that everybody had to pay attention to, whether they liked them or not.
Exactly. It’s fun for a discussion, but I never really expect it to have a resolution, unlike, say, in the UK, where the official answer of The Beatles is clearly understood, and if anyone is offering a counter, they know they have to do it relative to the Beatles*.
*No, I am NOT saying one can offer some objective answer. I am just saying the conventional wisdom is understood, similar to starting off a discussion about basketball by citing Michael Jordan. You may disagree, but you understand that the conversation starts there.
I think part of it may be that the UK has traditions of town/community/neighborhood bands as a social activity, which don’t exist as much in the US.
I’m also sure someone with more scholarly knowledge than me, could probably concoct some kind of theory about American “individualism” vs. British “communalism”.
I don’t think whether a performer or a band that was a big influence on another band I like has any affect on what I think of the influencing band. It’s what they do with that influence that counts.
If Eddie Van Halen told how beets are the biggest influence on his guitar playing, that a plate of diced beats gets him in the mood before every concert, that years working on a beet farm in Idaho gave him the idea for his entire sound, well, none of that will make me start liking beets.
Put me on the list, burn my name, but I hate the dead.
Yes, I understand the reference to The Velvet Underground and respect and agree with its intent.
That’s not my point - the point is that Van Halen had huge, obvious and immediate impact on rock music. You are welcome to think imagining hard rock without Van Halen is easy, but it is simply, obviously incorrect in reality. Van Halen was directly responsible for re-heating LA’s Sunset Strip as a source for bands, and for their hard rock+pop sensibility+charming frontman which became the blueprint for Hair Metal, which dominated MTV in the late 80’s. And all of guitar-making tilted in Eddie’s direction. I have no data, but wouldn’t be surprised if 15%-20% of the solidbody guitar market was for VH-type guitars after he came on the scene, by all makers, but including the ones he himself licensed with Kramer, Peavey, Fender and how his own Fender-build EVH line. No one came close to Eddie’s influence on guitar sales except Stevie Ray Vaughn throughout the 80’s until Slash came along and reinvigorated the Les Paul.
I would argue that both contemporary metal and electronic dance music have their roots in psychedelia, in electronic experimentation (case in point: Jefferson Airplane: Chushingura, The House at Pooneil Corners; later international influences: Black Sabbath:FX; Kraftwerk: Heavy Metal Kids).
So, greatest and most influental band should be from that era. Jefferson Airplane, Beach Boys and The Doors were already mentioned. I’d add The Byrds.
But if you want to widen the inflences even more, to the punk realm:
This is nicely put. I ponder a certain sub-genre of music and ask myself the same thing when it comes to determining where certain songs stack up as “greatest” (a thread for another time, perhaps). Ultimately, it comes down to relevance for me: how long has an act been relevant, how wide is the population that listens to them, how big was a band at its peak – and how long was its peak/how long was the band on top. As influential and special as many of the bands listed in this thread were, if they’re not relevant to a large rock-listening audience, they’re out, IMHO. I work in a live music bar three nights a week and I appreciate the shit out of the Ramones now, but their audience is relatively small despite their influence on later artists. And while the Grateful Dead has perhaps the most loyal of followers, the size does not compare to others.
For me, it’s Bruce narrowly edging out the Eagles, followed by TP & H. Sorry, OP.
The problem with the **Grateful Dead **& **Allman Brothers **(in the context of this thread) to me is that your average person on the street doesn’t know any of the songs. Has everyone heard of them? Yes. But no one outside of the hardcore fans knows any songs. Unlike Aerosmith or Lynyrd Skynyrd or The Boss.
Also, I don’t get why the Ramones get so much credit for influencing punk/hardcore. I mean Black Sabbath was playing Paranoid in 1969 and put it out on record in 1970, and that sounds more punk and hardcore to me than anything I’ve ever heard by the Ramones who didn’t put their first record until 1976.
