Post An Unpopular Opinion

[Sphinx]

I don't mind them either but I wouldn't say they're significant enough to prove a rich musical history.

Obviously, love them or hate them, Oasis dominated that scene and they're Manchester. And Stone Roses were a big influence on them, also Manchester. 

Also, it's the nightlife that's a big part of its history. Whether it be raves, the Hacienda, Canal Street or anything in between, it influenced music and fashion. Birmingham doesn't have anything close to that.

[Carbomb]

Absolutely fair points, the both of you. Scratch Ocean Colour Scene from the list, then.

@PunkStep - that's true. I don't think London should be counted because it's always had an unfair advantage, in most ways. In terms of music output, because the entertainment industries in the UK have historically been based there in the larger part, a lot of music acts and performers from other parts of the country have gravitated towards London to improve their chances of getting a big break, so there are a lot of bands that were formed in London but aren't really "from" there. Dire Straits are one case that come to mind; the original Fleetwood Mac another.

EDIT: Ooh, did another quick Google search, seems that Dexy's Midnight Runners were from Birmingham too.

Edited July 28, 2018 by Carbomb

[wordsfromlee]

57 minutes ago, Carbomb said:

Birmingham's not just metal, though (although you missed out Judas Priest) - Led Zeppelin, Duran Duran, The Moody Blues, ELO, Ocean Colour Scene and Fine Young Cannibals are the ones that I can name off the top of my head, in addition to Sabbath, mentioned above. Didn't know Napalm Death and Godflesh were from Brum, though.

EDIT: A quick Google also says The Streets, UB40, Wizzard, and Traffic are also from there too.

I wouldn't call Led Zeppelin a Brummie band. They formed in London and had one member who was originally from West Brom.

[Keith Houchen]

How were Led Zeppelin a Birmingham band?  They were formed in London and none of them were from Birmingham?

Manchester beats Liverpool because of the depth of the roster.  Take out The Beatles and who does Liverpool have as trailblazers?  Not exactly a smorgasbord of Hucknalls is it?  I think I'm going to write a wine bar song called Smorgasbord Of Hucknall.

 

EDIT - Wordsfrommlee posted first

Edited July 28, 2018 by Keith Houchen
And she's buying a Stairway to Aston.

[Gus Mears]

1 minute ago, Keith Houchen said:

Manchester beats Liverpool because of the depth of the roster.  Take out The Beatles and who does Liverpool have as trailblazers? 

Cilla Black.

[Carbomb]

Weird - could've sworn Led were from Birmingham. OK, consider my point destroyed.

Been looking at Manchester's output versus Liverpool's on Wiki - looks like you're right there, Keith. Although I'd say considering only "trailblazers" is a very limiting criterion; there are plenty other bands that maybe influenced a lot of people, but weren't necessarily doing something unprecedented.

[Keith Houchen]

5 minutes ago, Carbomb said:

Weird - could've sworn Led were from Birmingham. OK, consider my point destroyed.

Been looking at Manchester's output versus Liverpool's on Wiki - looks like you're right there, Keith. Although I'd say considering only "trailblazers" is a very limiting criterion; there are plenty other bands that maybe influenced a lot of people, but weren't necessarily doing something unprecedented.

Fair enough, trail blazing should be limited to the Hucknalls and Blacks of the world.

I was meaning in terms of influence.  Whether you like the music or not, I'd say Joy Division, New Order, Stone Roses/Happy Mondays, Factory records and the Hacienda, The Smiths, Oasis et al have all had a cultural impact as well as a musical influence.  I don't think any other UK city has that depth.  As good as Echo And The Bunnymen were, I don't think they were as an important band as the ones listed.

[Cod Eye]

Wolves creating a squad of Mendes' players is amazing, and will completely improve the second tier of English football....

[Briefcase]

18 hours ago, Carbomb said:

Take That are not "fucking legends mate", and any bloke saying it now is a liar; pretty much every self-respecting bloke in the 90s expressed nothing but hatred for them and the dross that was East 17.

Just because they were away for a while didn't make them good. Their reunion was much like the the reunification of East and West Germany - people were initially quite positive, but then everyone remembered what they were like before the split.

 

2 hours ago, Sphinx said:

And I don't think Manchester having the best musical history in the UK is unpopular at all. Nowhere else can lay claim to Simply Red for a start.

Gary Barlow is from Manchester as well. Just saying. 

[Keith Houchen]

You know how in Lost they had to press that button every 88 minutes or whatever it was?  Well similarly, I have to periodically remind @Frankie Crisp that Gary Barlow has blocked me on Twitter.

[Devon Malcolm]

I think that the sheer size of The Beatles has overshadowed a lot of great bands and acts that have come out of Liverpool, which isn't the fault of The Beatles, obviously.

Manchester has benefitted from the fact that we have never had a band of that size. Oasis were huge obviously but they came along at a time when Mancunian music had started to head downhill a bit so there weren't as many acts for them to overshadow anyway.

I'd say Manchester has had a wider range of acts in terms of genre than Liverpool as well. Then again, you could say that The Beatles were / are SO huge that they could almost beat everything that came out of Manchester combined.

[Keith Houchen]

I do think Manchester has become just like Liverpool in the sense that it glorifies the past and hasn't produced anything groundbreaking since.  I have another.

 

The Beatles are not the most influential band of the last 100 years.

 

[Accident Prone]

I think UB40 cancels out any goodwill Birmingham had built up anyway.

[Devon Malcolm]

3 minutes ago, Keith Houchen said:

I do think Manchester has become just like Liverpool in the sense that it glorifies the past and hasn't produced anything groundbreaking since.  I have another.

True. And I think it's a shame for both cities because they have consistently continued to produce good acts since their respective golden eras. But I feel like if you're a Liverpool band coming along that doesn't have that Beatles sound or you're a Manc act that doesn't have that Madchester sound then you don't really get absorbed into that city's musical heritage.

[Sphinx]

10 minutes ago, Devon Malcolm said:

True. And I think it's a shame for both cities because they have consistently continued to produce good acts since their respective golden eras. But I feel like if you're a Liverpool band coming along that doesn't have that Beatles sound or you're a Manc act that doesn't have that Madchester sound then you don't really get absorbed into that city's musical heritage.

Yeah, I agree with that. I don't think that Manc artists have to stray away from their sound completely, but Madchester sound wasn't all indie. In house and dance music it still had a distinct loose feel to it that sounded Manchester - I was thinking this recently when I heard an M People song on the radio. I didn't know they were from there but guessed correctly based on the sound. I think you can still incorporate that but it doesn't necessarily have to be guitar music.

28 minutes ago, Keith Houchen said:

The Beatles are not the most influential band of the last 100 years.

Who are then?