Why Do The English Have Better Taste Than Americans?

**markydefad** · December 3rd, 2001, 04:03 PM

I'm listening to Sarah Cracknell's CD called "Lipslide" and I'm reminded once again, how much the English still seem to appreciate and produce classic pop and dance music so much more than Americans.

Last week we were posting about Swing Out Sister, Everything But The Girl, Basia, Lisa Stansfield, Brand New Heavies, Incognito, etc. and I forgot to mention another group I enjoyed-- Saint Etienne (Cracknell is the lead singer), and it occurred to me that all this music came from England. Are there any American groups that have the feel for classic pop/r&b that these English acts capture so well? Is there still a nostalgia and appreciation for the likes of Dusty Springfield, Dionne Warwick & all that great Bacharach/David or The Supremes and all that great Holland/Dozier/Holland or The Three Degrees and all that great Gamble/Huff in England that makes newer groups want to emulate that music of the past? There sure is in the music coming or maybe, I should say, that came out of England into the 1990's.

Now very little of this music made much of a splash in the U.S, so consequently as Paulo said, Swing Out Sister's music is now released in Japan only! What's wrong with the rest of the world?

Does the English pop chart consist mainly of hiphop/gangsta rap crap like the U.S. charts do? I'd be curious to know if England has better taste, more eclectic taste, or just a softspot in their hearts for classic pop?

Would appreciate your input.

_________________

Make My Feet Wanna Dance!

Markydefad

[ This Message was edited by: markydefad on 2001-12-03 17:07 ]

[ This Message was edited by: markydefad on 2001-12-03 17:09 ]

**paul** · December 3rd, 2001, 04:58 PM

Great topic Markey. I'm curious as well if the rest of the world, Britain and Italy in particular have psuedo tough guy attitudes in the primarily male dominated music today. Even some of the female artist that perform rap/hip-hop have this kind of edge. I noticed this gradual musical change in the mid eighties. I'm not sure but even the movies have taken on too much of this sort of thing. I have always felt the Europeans have a broader appreciation for various styles of music from women, men and everyone in between. I could be way off base though.

**markydefad** · December 3rd, 2001, 05:17 PM

Hmmm... so Paul are you saying that I'm pining for the return of a more female-oriented music? You know maybe you're right. I didn't think of it when I was posting, but maybe that is "girlie" music. But ya know I liked the Beatles, Rolling Stones, Doors, Kinks, Who, etc. and they rocked pretty hard. I like Lenny Kravitz, Collective Soul, Sugar Ray, Smash Mouth, New Radicals, Train, U2 and a lot of other contemporary rock artists/groups.

I guess Disco was considered on the feminine side of pop/r&b, hence all the rage from the testosterone fueled males that it was threatening, right?

**paul** · December 3rd, 2001, 05:51 PM

Well. I don't know if disco was on the feminine side, not there's anything wrong with that

I like to think of disco as all inclusive, sex, race, nationallity, age, etc didn't matter.

I don't know exactly what it is but try as I may, I find it difficult today to find a nice groove that a Chaka Khan, Teena Marie or Emotions for example are known for. I don't think I had to work that hard at it before.

**markydefad** · December 3rd, 2001, 06:26 PM

Doesn't the female population of the U.S. buy music anymore? Or do they just listen to whiny boybands and pouty teenage sluts? What happens what they get older and want something more sophisticated than Britney?

I'm just curious why the U.S. pop charts are so dominated by hiphop/rap. It seems that in Europe female pop gets more exposure, i.e. the recent deluge of posts about Kylie Minogue, who hasn't seen U.S. chart action since 1989.

Another good example would be Cher's "Believe" which topped the charts in many countries of the world before it was even played on U.S. radio. I remember Michael Paoletta in his Billboard Dance column saying he hoped that Cher's single wasn't gonna be bypassed by U.S. radio, in their year-end issue. Amazingly, Cher started doing (lipsynching) spots on the American Music Awards and the late shows and all of a sudden, the song hit radio and was a smash. And this from an over-50 female who first charted in 1965!

Maybe the lesson from this is "If you play it, they will buy it". But truthfully there hasn't been much of that type of dance music to crossover on the U.S. charts since, so I guess the lesson wasn't learned?

_________________

Make My Feet Wanna Dance!

Markydefad

[ This Message was edited by: markydefad on 2001-12-03 19:34 ]

[ This Message was edited by: markydefad on 2001-12-03 20:05 ]

**Disco77** · December 4th, 2001, 03:51 PM

I'm not sure whether it isn't a question of exposure rather than taste. Europeans, in general, are more open to all kinds of music, whether it be edgy and experimental or trivial and poppy. When was the last time that an opera aria was on the top 40 in North America? Never.

Perhaps record executives, most coming from corporate law or financial backgrounds, can only see the business side of music and are unwilling on exposing the american public to something untried and untrue. First week sales may not be phenomenal.

Hence the droning sameness of everything we hear on the radio and the interminable lapse of time between anything remotely groundbreaking.

**NickNack** · December 4th, 2001, 04:07 PM

Good topic, Mark. I would like to hear from some of our 'guys and gals' in England. What is on the charts over there and how it compares here.

I was wondering why I haven't seen a Swing Out Sister cd since their 1997 release. This group and the other six you mention deserve better. Swing Out Sister was happening long before Todd Terry came into the mix but, as you say, no radio play = no glory.

**Paulo** · December 4th, 2001, 04:30 PM

Hello everybody:

Concerning Swing Out Sister, they haven't released anything in Britain or USA since their SHAPES AND PATTERNS album, but they keep on recording and releasing albums (only in japan). Since the one above, they released 2 more: FILTH AND DREAMS and this year's SOMEWHERE DEEP IN THE NIGHT.

The music is very sophisticated, jazzy with strings and horn arrangements attached to Andy Connell's keyboards. Very beautiful albums, but not predictable pop music. Maybe this explains why they vanished from the public eye.

A lot of 80's groups were totally forgotten by the 90's generation. What a shame, because they were superior to 90's artists in my opinion.

Bye

Paulo

**markydefad** · December 4th, 2001, 05:39 PM

Hmmm...well, Paulo, I guess the Brits don't appreciate Swing Out Sister anymore, either. Do I have to amend the title of the post to "Why Do The Japanese Have Better Taste Than Brits & Americans"?

At least, the artists themselves demonstrate a love for classic pop/r&b mixed with a jazzy vibe. I'd be curious to hear the two latest Swing Out Sister cds. Are they outrageously expensive as Japanese imports? Sometimes that gets as high as $30.00 per CD...I'll have to check them out.

We do need input from those members who live in the U.K.-- Paging move2this & phyllis hyman and others who live in the U.K....R.S.V.P.

_________________

Make My Feet Wanna Dance!

Markydefad

[ This Message was edited by: markydefad on 2001-12-04 18:44 ]

**HustleBaby** · December 5th, 2001, 04:57 PM

I remember Swing Out Sister. The only radio stations that used to play them were the jazz

stations and Lite F.M every once in awhile.

Unfortunately record producers have bombarded us with hip hop/rap, boy bands and

bubblegum manufactured sex symbols(Britney).

The type of music we have today have no soul,

originality or style. I have noticed that

europeans are definitely open-minded to all

types of music. Especially when disco was attacked and exiled from the USA. That is the reason why I don't watch VH1 or MTV! It's

been created for the "ME" generation(teeny

boppers) that won't appreciate "good music"!

Maybe foreigners do have better taste than americans.

DELIGHTFUL!!

**littlemartin** · December 6th, 2001, 07:01 PM

I wouldn't necessarily say better taste but I can think of a dozen reasons right away as to why taste is different there. One of the biggest is CD vs. vinyl. I'm from England and go back regularly but live in the U.S. and was shocked to see how easily Americans abandoned their turntables and record collections to switch to CD's (although I have done very well by that abandonement ty very much). While most everyone in Britain has a CD player, I think it's uncommon for people to get rid of their turntables. CD's might be more popular but they still have turntables and record collections. A kid that comes across a Supremes LP for a buck might well buy it and bring it home to play. That is just NOT an option for the majority of US households.

**HustleBaby** · December 6th, 2001, 08:25 PM

I meant a better appreciation of music and

arts. Plus it also seems like europeans is

not so quick to snob a performer that americans feel is "over the hill". Someone mentioned Cher for an example (her music was supposed to have been played in Europe first. Tina Turner is another example of a performer who did well in Europe without having to fit in a certain clique or look.

DELIGHTFUL!!!

**markydefad** · December 7th, 2001, 11:49 AM

On 2001-12-06 20:01, littlemartin wrote:

I wouldn't necessarily say better taste but I can think of a dozen reasons right away as to why taste is different there. One of the biggest is CD vs. vinyl. I'm from England and go back regularly but live in the U.S. and was shocked to see how easily Americans abandoned their turntables and record collections to switch to CD's (although I have done very well by that abandonement ty very much). While most everyone in Britain has a CD player, I think it's uncommon for people to get rid of their turntables. CD's might be more popular but they still have turntables and record collections. A kid that comes across a Supremes LP for a buck might well buy it and bring it home to play. That is just NOT an option for the majority of US households.

--------------------------------------------

Finally, a post from someone who actually lived in England! The point about about Brits keeping their turntables is interesting--I could never understand why some of my friends got rid of their turntables and sold their vinyl as soon as CD's hit the market.

Nevertheless, what about all those UK imports we buy over here in the U.S. that rerelease old dance & soul classics that we are unable to buy as domestic pressings? There is some kind of special appreciation for classic stuff over there that transcends U.S. interest, at least in the repackaging and marketing of classic dance & r&b product.

When I go to Tower to look at the import stuff, I can always find goodies from the U.K. that aren't available as domestic product and often they're very reasonably priced, too. The Japanese are also responsible for lots of reissues, but their stuff is EXPENSIVE. I checked CD Now for the live Swing Out Sister CD and they had a list price of $41.49 and a sale price of $35.99 for a 10 song CD!!!

_________________

Make My Feet Wanna Dance!

Markydefad

[ This Message was edited by: markydefad on 2001-12-07 12:53 ]

**markydefad** · December 7th, 2001, 12:18 PM

And, one more thing...Delightful is dead on with her assertion that beloved performers in the UK are not discarded to the trash heap as quickly as in the U.S. Once your hit-making days are done here it's off to Vegas, Atlantic City, or worse some caravan of oldies performers working state fairs or Amway conventions.

Someone on Napster told me that Kelly Marie and Hazell Dean and, was it Tina Charles (?) still perform in the UK (although it may be at less prestigious venues--I don't think they have county fairs there, do they?)

**Outsider** · December 7th, 2001, 04:13 PM

I may be a little late with this one by now, but I also remember Swing Out Sister. I remember their song "Breakout" and another one I think is called "Twilight World" (or something like that). It's nice to know they're still making music.

Also, how popular are hard rock bands such as Korn and Slipknot in England? How about other newer rock bands such as Staind? I'm curious to know.

**MiaBocca** · December 9th, 2001, 06:09 AM

I'm from the UK, so I'll try to give you a run down of what's happening at the mo'.

The British music scene seems in a state at the moment if you ask me, they've had 70's, 80's and 90's revivals in music all in the past 2 years, and it's a little mish-mashed.

Most pop bands are vocodering themselves into oblivion. It seems were just coming OUT of a slew of trashy bubble-gum pop acts, with only the successful ones being left.

Acts like Steps (5 piece boy/girl group prodcued by Pete Waterman of SAW), S Club 7 (Steps-lite), and a couple of Boy Bands.

There's the UK Garage scene which is kinda like US Garage mixed with Drum & Bass, but that will last as long as Drum & Bass and Jungle I imagine, and the acts that topped the charts a year ago are already losing ground.

Dance music is also a little odd, too many styles around: UK Garage, Trance (still!) and Hard House are all popular.

With concern to American music, it's a mixed bag - Britney is tops, NSync are virtually unknown.

Weatus, Eminem, Slipknot et all are popular with the kids, they seem to be filling the rebellious music phase that 14/15 year olds go through nicely.

The older kids/young adults are still in that old Britpop phase with Coldplay, Radio Head and Travis et all being popular.

A very mixed bag! And like I said, there's still shades of the 70's revival from a while back, but that's all but turned into the 80's revival with vocoders and daft punk vocals in every pop song around.

There's the early 90's revival too, with Rave and House anthems being re-released left, right and center - and also a slew of compilation albums featuring said anthems.

To me (and this is my opinion), music seems to be desperately trying to find something new to call's it's own for this era.

We're in a new millenium, and I guess the collective conscience has been expecting so much from the future that now it's here, it's a bit of an anti-climax.

The younger generation today don't seem to have any music or sub-cultures that are truly original, and in the search for something to define this era they seem to be raping and pilaging the past 30 years in hope that they can mix something up and call it their own.

LOL A little deep there, but that's what I see from the UK music charts / scene.

**kelvy** · December 9th, 2001, 01:32 PM

On 2001-12-09 07:09, MiaBocca wrote:

To me (and this is my opinion), music seems to be desperately trying to find something new to call's it's own for this era.

We're in a new millenium, and I guess the collective conscience has been expecting so much from the future that now it's here, it's a bit of an anti-climax.

The younger generation today don't seem to have any music or sub-cultures that are truly original, and in the search for something to define this era they seem to be raping and pilaging the past 30 years in hope that they can mix something up and call it their own.

LOL A little deep there, but that's what I see from the UK music charts / scene.

so true what you've stated in terms of the desperation to create a unique music genre for this new millenium. it's still kind of early to tell what direction this decade will turn in terms of music (specifically mass-marketed music). to me, the musical direction of a decade usually does not reveal itself until mid-decade. By 2004-2005, i think we will get a relatively decent idea of what is going on pop music wise.

and the mishmashing of styles youth is undertaking is mad rampant! not just music but fashion. it's the end of 2001 and already name-belt-buckles and studded belts are making a comeback from the 80s...pretty soon, i would not be surprised if we'll start taking inspiration from the late 90s, which is hardly inspiring to begin with.

as all of you may well know, stateside pop music is in a stage of stagnancy, fueled by an economy in recession. The rap bubble gets even huger and huger(a trend going back a decade ago) with more of the same "bling-bling, baller" lyrics. as an aside, there's still some of that god-awful "rap-metal" hybrid to the likes of limp biskit, & the poppy boybands still reign huge (not surprising, since there have been a recent population upsurge of teenagers not seen in many years). r&b (the pop variation) is still megapopular as ever, but the more popular it gets, the crappier it gets; unless you're looking at acts such as Maxwell and the like. too much "baby mamma drama" lyrics.

one also has to consider that in the states, most radio stations are owned by just a few conglomerates which usually revolve around the same limited amount of songs (which are mostly provided in 'payola' form. it is legal since no money is usually exchanged between the record company representative and the station managers. the 'payola' comes through via gifts such as gift certificates and new vans for the radio station...therefore, most pop music is not really what the public deems popular but actually determined by how much the record company is willing to dish out to get their record played).

it's no wonder that there is so much stagnancy. this generation needs a sesmic musical revolution; one of the magnitude like the beatles or the early disco years....we have not had a good one in ages!

let's keep this going...

get back at me,

kelvy

**PhyllisHyman** · December 9th, 2001, 05:15 PM

Just to add my tuppence worth to this. MiaBocca didn't mention the huge success here of the Popstars/PopIdols programmes. Hear'say, the first winners, had huge success earlier in the year but already their star is waning. Their second album has debuted this week at No. 20 which is very poor considering the first one went in at 1 and their 1st single off it went in at 4 with sales of around 50k-ish. Considering their very 1st single had first week sales of 550k this is not a good sign (for them!).

Dance (as in house) is not as strong as it was but Flawless, Starlight and Rapture have been huge hits both in sales and at radio and has led to yet another genre of dance - FM House (where do they get these terms?). Last week a Russian trance track went in at 3. However some of the tracks that were huge in Ibiza and were expected to do well here underperformed. I think there are two reasons for this. One is the success of compilations here and secondly I think radio (and especially BBC Radio 1) is playing tracks too far ahead of release. By the time they come out people are bored and have moved on. The other thing is (and I think someone here said it) is that people don't want to hear tracks on the radio that they've heard out at a club. I think it loses it's coolness when you get six year olds who know all the words!

I don't think we have better taste (bob the builder and the tweenies had a huge hits this year -don't ask)but we are subject to more influence from abroad and being a smaller country means it's easier to get a buzz going about something new.

And lastly , for me, one of the biggest reasons for the diversity of music here is the use of drugs and E in particular. People both straight and gay have been taking it en masse for almost 15 years now. They've danced to Garage, Acid house, Hard House, Tech House and all the rest of it. Now the older crowd are getting in to more downtempo music hence the popularity of chill out albums which is opening up the boundaries for them about what is "dance". I actually think the next major movement in dance is going to come from the States as more kids do E and get into dance. And if Eminem is singing the praises of Purple Pills, sorry that should be Purple Hills, then who knows what'll happen.

Finally 2 recommendations: Royskopp and Playgroup. Oh! and Goldfrapp, Kinobe & Zero 7

**Outsider** · December 9th, 2001, 08:02 PM

Is Oasis still huge in England? I personally can't stand them, but I used to read that they were the biggest band in England since the Beatles. Was that true, or was that a major exaggeration? They were only marginally successful here in America.

**MiaBocca** · December 10th, 2001, 08:37 AM

Oasis haven't really released anything in ages, and are a bit old hat now.

But I think they've got something lined up for next year, and due to their constant media attention in the tabloids and magazines (baby's, girlfriends etc) they are bound to make an impression again.

I imagine we'll see a mid-nineties revival starting when they release their album LOL

Retro is gonna catch up to us soon, they what will they do! LOL

About Popstars/Popidol: HearSay did really well at first, but as you have said they are definately on the way out.

I think we are seeing how long such bands can last in that environment of huge media campaign, 6 months advertising and build up for the single/album, with the TV Series.

But what they have done is shorten the life of an all ready short-lived music form.

Pop bands stay around for abour 3/4 years, and by pumping them full-on with the TV shows, they shortened it to about 1 year/ 18 months.

For me personally I can't help but think that the record companies are putting money into pop because they know it will get them money now, but they aren't looking at the industry in the longer term.

If a pop band doesn't perform after the first 2/3 singles they are history and the album doesn't get released.

So these groups have 2/3 singles to reach a mass audience and connect. In the past, I think artists were given 2/3 ALBUMS to do that!

Each week you see these pop muppets miming to **** songs, getting to No.1 - whilst real good groups - such as ones mentioned here, that I personally LOVE - like Brand New Heavies, Incognito, Saint Etienne, they are all virtually unknown and buried except for 1 or 2 tracks.

I think by always looking for the next biggest thing, they are missing out on what they already have.

**PhyllisHyman** · December 10th, 2001, 01:58 PM

Totally agree with you about Incognito. Their new album is fantastic but hasn't done very well which is a real shame.

**markydefad** · December 10th, 2001, 04:04 PM

Wow, what a deluge of info came in over the weekend! Unfortunately, I guess the bottom line of the posts is that the state of music in the UK is similar to sorry state it is in the US.

I guess my barometer for interesting groups is a decade behind the times. Ah well, at least some English groups attempted a jazzy soul revival; I can't think of any American groups who did. Since soul music went to the "street" for it's inspiration, the predominate infuence is Compton not the Brill Building. Therefore, we get those clever rhymes that must make the ghosts of Cole Porter& Lorenz Hart,and the still-living legend Stephen Sondheim , et.al, envious of the rhymin'& sales skills of the gangsta thugs. "I shop at Old Navy/ my ho's hair be wavy/ my moms make good gravy" (ah, the poetry of the streets.....)

_________________

Make My Feet Wanna Dance!

Markydefad

[ This Message was edited by: markydefad on 2001-12-10 17:25 ]

[ This Message was edited by: markydefad on 2001-12-10 20:14 ]

**originalbigm** · December 10th, 2001, 06:40 PM

I agree that music on both sides of the Atlantic is in a sad state of affairs.Over here in North America,I agree with someone's earlier observation that it is dictated by greedy Music executives who simply want to line there pockets via the latest hottest act which seem to appear on a daily basis.One hot act spawns dozens of copycats all trying the same formula.We are deluged with one or two hit wonders.Record the song, chart it, sell it,milk it and move on.Creativity and artistry have been lost.I certainly believe Technology has stripped music of it's lushness and soul.It's sterile.

**Move2This** · December 11th, 2001, 04:26 AM

As far as I'm concerned any interest in what's popular and what's not evaporated at least 10 years ago. I thought the only people who bought singles and followed the charts now were 10 year old girls .....

Part of this, of course, is simply the increasing cynicism that comes with age, but my general impression of most popular music around in the UK since the mid 90s is either that it is uninspired and uninteresting, or downright unpleasant.

What now passes as "soul" seems to be bland stuff sung by scantily clad girl groups who have nothing but their lack of clothing to recommend them. Hip hop and rap might as well be from another planet as far as I'm concerned, and I'm sure it might be a lot of fun making hard house and techno tracks, but is the result really that interesting? A lot of people say "ah, yes, but you've got to be on E to appreciate them" ... but isn't that the same as saying they're a bit crap if you're not on drugs??

I tend to appreciate music more in retrospect than in the present, however. This is how I got interested in disco and HiNRG in the first place, so maybe I'll be singing the praises of more recent stuff in years to come!

**Bernie** · December 11th, 2001, 07:48 AM

On 2001-12-11 05:26, Move2This wrote:

I tend to appreciate music more in retrospect than in the present, however. This is how I got interested in disco and HiNRG in the first place, so maybe I'll be singing the praises of more recent stuff in years to come!

This is a trait of mine as well. I usually don't appreciate a certain style of music until later. I hate to admit that many times it is out of sheer ignorance I can still remember when I used to say that dance rock/new wave sucked. Of course, I love it.