At what year in history does your acute knowledge of music come to an abrupt end?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

I can barely tread water when it comes to having a serious conversation about music from before 1963 and if things happen to go back as far as 1957, well then I just sink like a sack of stones.

What about the rest of you? Confess your ignorance here.

― may pang (maypang), Friday, 13 February 2004 22:56 (twenty years ago) link

I don't know anything after 1999.

― Eyeball Kicks (Eyeball Kicks), Friday, 13 February 2004 22:58 (twenty years ago) link

2002.

― Sean M (Sean M), Friday, 13 February 2004 23:00 (twenty years ago) link

1980

But no good music was made before then anyway.

― 239, Friday, 13 February 2004 23:03 (twenty years ago) link

Sometime in the late 90's or so.

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Friday, 13 February 2004 23:05 (twenty years ago) link

Whatever year Shabba Ranks first started making music.

― dean! (deangulberry), Friday, 13 February 2004 23:35 (twenty years ago) link

It gets dimmer and dimmer before the Beatles.

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Friday, 13 February 2004 23:36 (twenty years ago) link

1980

But no good music was made before then anyway.

What an original viewpoint! Please, tell us more!

― Steev, Friday, 13 February 2004 23:44 (twenty years ago) link

1963

― anthony kyle monday (akmonday), Friday, 13 February 2004 23:53 (twenty years ago) link

1770

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Friday, 13 February 2004 23:58 (twenty years ago) link

I can do OK from the late-50s to the late-60s, but then there's a drought until '75-6. And all I know post-2001 is pop music and hip-hop, I don't recognize most of the rock acts around.

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Saturday, 14 February 2004 00:05 (twenty years ago) link

Everything before 1990 I'm kinda fuzzy on.

― Nick Mirov (nick), Saturday, 14 February 2004 00:10 (twenty years ago) link

before 1900, after 2040 (when i die)

― jack cole (jackcole), Saturday, 14 February 2004 00:19 (twenty years ago) link

Crystal clear until about 92, decent from there until around 67.

― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Saturday, 14 February 2004 02:00 (twenty years ago) link

I'm in the same boat as may. 1963 is the limit of my competancy, except for a gap that runs from about 1970-1976 because I think that was an incredibly shitty time for music (relatively speaking), so I don't know much about that particular period.

― Barry Bruner (Barry Bruner), Saturday, 14 February 2004 02:03 (twenty years ago) link

My '90s is kinda fuzzy, everything else is OK

― jody (Jody Beth Rosen), Saturday, 14 February 2004 02:06 (twenty years ago) link

anything from around '70 - '76 that isn't fleetwood mac or queen is a total dead zone for me

― the surface noise (electricsound), Saturday, 14 February 2004 02:13 (twenty years ago) link

before 1970 it's total pick'n'mix. it gets progressively better as time goes on too.

― strongo hulkington (dubplatestyle), Saturday, 14 February 2004 02:17 (twenty years ago) link

I'm definitely way better on the '20s than the '30s. Maybe people just stopped making records then, though, because of the depression. I'm not sure.

― chuck, Saturday, 14 February 2004 02:19 (twenty years ago) link

I am terribly weak when it comes to everything before 1900. I don't think I could even tell you what century Bach flourished in, for example.

― Michael Daddino (epicharmus), Saturday, 14 February 2004 02:22 (twenty years ago) link

Yeah, I used to think that was the worst stretch of music as well. Re: 1970-76. I don't know how old you guys are but I'm noticing that as I approach 30 it's getting easier and easier for me to find stuff in there that I enjoy. I fear a prog phase is just around the corner.

― may pang (maypang), Saturday, 14 February 2004 02:24 (twenty years ago) link

American & British pop/rock - 1958 to 1981
Blues - 1950 to 1985
Baroque - I'll never know all I want to. But I keep trying.

― jim wentworth (wench), Saturday, 14 February 2004 02:44 (twenty years ago) link

Generally, I would say 1963. Although I don't know quite as much about 1963-1980 as I know about 1980 onwards.

― Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Saturday, 14 February 2004 02:58 (twenty years ago) link

I'm ok on the 90s and 70s, but the 80s throw me for a loop - which is weird, because that's when I started really listening to music.

― dleone (dleone), Saturday, 14 February 2004 03:04 (twenty years ago) link

also i know nothing pre-63ish

― the surface noise (electricsound), Saturday, 14 February 2004 03:06 (twenty years ago) link

God, we're pathetic.

― may pang (maypang), Saturday, 14 February 2004 03:10 (twenty years ago) link

OK from probably 1960 to 1980 with some glaring blindspots. 1980 onwards pretty good - weakest years then are probably 98-00, the years between working in a second-hand record chain and getting P2P.

I've actually been using Soulseek to try and work out exactly when I started listening to pop music and what songs I liked or could remember (by downloading squillions of hits from 80/81). It's another one in the 'articles I'm going to write' file.

― Tico Tico (Tico Tico), Saturday, 14 February 2004 11:32 (twenty years ago) link

Definite good knowledge 1982-1998 (secondary school through university, the times when I had more time to be obsessive). Passable knowledge of sixties chart pop I guess, courtesy of my mother. OK on late seventies, early 80s, but I was a little young so there are gaps. The rest of the seventies, I know very little specifics but a lot of basics. Pre-about-1962, not nearly enough.

― ailsa (ailsa), Saturday, 14 February 2004 11:45 (twenty years ago) link

ailsa - you must've spent a long time in education!

What is it about 1963? I think it's got something to do with the Beatles breaking big. I'm more of a Beach Boys fan, so I guess my music knowledge could start at 1961. Not so up on my 80s music. I suppose there are periods where I know a bit about one genre and not about others. The 1970-76 phenomenon is interesting but I guess I must have a whole load of dub and roots reggae from that period, a bit of King Crimson, Tom Waits, Neil Young, Sabbath late period Beach Boys etc.

― dog latin (dog latin), Saturday, 14 February 2004 13:38 (twenty years ago) link

there are certain things I will know abt from the 1900-1950 but very weak for the most part.

from 1950-2000: quite a lot better but in certain pop/avant-garde things but I've read far more than heard bah...

― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Saturday, 14 February 2004 13:51 (twenty years ago) link

Compared with my knowledge of UK Punk 1977-1979, everything else fades into insignificance I'm afraid.

"What is it about 1963?"

That was the year I was born.

― Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Saturday, 14 February 2004 14:08 (twenty years ago) link

secondary school = 1983 - 1990. University 1 = 1991-1996. University 2 = 1997 - 1999. Is that not normal?

― ailsa (ailsa), Saturday, 14 February 2004 18:25 (twenty years ago) link

Barry, Jim, May: Why the 70-76 blind spot? Barry, do you "think that was an incredibly shitty time for music (relatively speaking)" because that's what you've read / been told or because you've tried it and that's your conclusion? If the latter, what leads you to that conclusion?

I'm particularly interested because (apart from the glam stuff etc. that I cut my musical teeth on, plus a very short list of "approved" bands / artists) I had a huge blind spot there myself for many years, which I'm now aware was largely induced by punk dogma.

In retrospect I'm still not sure. It certainly wasn't the total wasteland I'd been led to believe but it's hard to get perspective.

― Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Saturday, 14 February 2004 19:03 (twenty years ago) link

I could get name a healthy list of artist back through the 40's and even sing some of the tunes, but pre war I'd be lost. 50's rock and roll I'm a better at.

― Speedy Gonzalas (Speedy Gonzalas), Saturday, 14 February 2004 19:13 (twenty years ago) link

started 1980 post-"punk dogma", or was there really any punk ? yes i cut out most rock music assuming it was all AOR in 1980 when i receieved the punk idea at school, and that held me over for years, and the later '80s it seemed the less popular-music that hit me was better, but for me 'indie' did not even include the cure, new order mbv stuff, so i lost interest in 1992 finally.
i had been going backwards in classical and jazz music for most of this time though, so it started with post-Parker and post-Davis, ie Mingus, Dolphy and Coltrane, which was the late '50s and then all the really free people, which has stayed interesting perhaps up until the 'free noise' and 'drone art' cash-ins ('95)
art music like sparks or roxy music or bowie seemed to get through despite the glam beginnings (the backlash against Slade, Gary Glitter etc.) , or devo in the time of Duran Duran, and i'd been enjoying the beatles since 1976 (half-start -- was not allowed to invest in the Stones or the Pistols until much later)
when i was at university radio at the height of Magazine and Joy Division (in that order) there was still plenty of room for Jefferson Airplane (but not Starship) reflecting the then almost-hippy-collective feeling student radios had (post disco-backlash, the reverse of the current situation)

― george gosset (gegoss), Sunday, 15 February 2004 05:20 (twenty years ago) link

Pop/rock/r&b I know basically from the beginning of the rock era (mid'50s) through 1989. I became an old fart (though not yet 25!) around 1990, altho rap, & then grunge held my interest for a few yrs after that.

Jazz I have a pretty good knowledge of from the mid-20s thru mid-70s, when it largely stopped evolving.

And what's wrong with 1970-76? Nothing! "Don't they know rock attained perfection in 1974?" - Homer Simpson (Well, personally I'd say 1970, when I was a toddler, but you get Homer's point.)

― Myonga Von Bontee, Monday, 16 February 2004 16:22 (twenty years ago) link

1998?

― Jon Williams (ex machina), Monday, 16 February 2004 16:26 (twenty years ago) link

A lot of the 90s is blank for me, I moved to America in 1992 and for a few years all I did was listen to the tapes I brought with me. I certainly didn't listen to the really shitty radio here and it wasn't until the internet came along that I got back in the loop.

― LondonLee (LondonLee), Monday, 16 February 2004 17:04 (twenty years ago) link

1955 to now, with a 'blind' for prog/rock 1969 to 1976.

― mark grout (mark grout), Monday, 16 February 2004 17:06 (twenty years ago) link

44BC!!!!!

― Old Fart!!! (oldfart_sd), Monday, 16 February 2004 17:17 (twenty years ago) link

somewhere around 1999-2000 I quit keeping up w/new stuff. never thought it would happen to me but it did! always loved pop junk, but when I check out something recent & mega-popular these days it inevitably sounds banal or insulting. to an old-fart like me, madonna snogging britny was like sammy davis hugging nixon...

― soniclifer, Monday, 16 February 2004 23:02 (twenty years ago) link

Stewart: a valid question ... punk dogma hasn't been a strong influence on my opinions since ~ 1996, when I listened to "Rumours" for the first time in years and discovered that it is a million billion times better than any punk album.
I'm from Canada (where glam meant little) and I was born in 1974 (so I'm too young to remember the glam era anyhow). When I was a kid, my parents liked classic rock and oldies (and *loved* disco, but that's another story) so I did grow up hearing a lot of 1970-76 music, and I have never liked it much. Mainly rock music is/was at fault -- clean production, few risks, the onset of crummy turgid "soft rock" that infected FM radio through most of my single digit years. That's not to say that there was nothing good during those years, hence the "relatively speaking" qualifier in my original post.
So yes, I have heard a lot of stuff from the 70-76 black hole, but didn't care much for it, and thus don't seek out much music from the time period, leading to the void in my "acute knowledge".

― Barry Bruner (Barry Bruner), Monday, 16 February 2004 23:24 (twenty years ago) link

Postscript: a lot of people cutoff ~1963, i.e. pre-Beatles. Accepted dogma also states that nothing happened between The Day The Music Died in 1959 and the Beatles landing in America, which I also used to believe before discovering the genius of Spector/ Lieber+Stoller/Brill Building writers and so on ...

― Barry Bruner (Barry Bruner), Monday, 16 February 2004 23:28 (twenty years ago) link

I've got some stuff pre-1930s, mostly the big bands, Louis Armstrong and some New Orleans shit, but I'm definitely best on 1950-now.

Jazz I have a pretty good knowledge of from the mid-20s thru mid-70s, when it largely stopped evolving.

Blech.

― Jordan (Jordan), Monday, 16 February 2004 23:38 (twenty years ago) link

2004

― feminazi (feminazi), Tuesday, 17 February 2004 00:15 (twenty years ago) link

Beatles was an important thing in 1963, but there were other changes going on then too. Phil Spector more or less invented the Wall Of Sound the year before, Motown developed their trademark sound (earlier Motown singles were standard R&B hits, sounding less typically Motown), Bob Dylan and Beach Boys both had their breakthrough. Certainly an important year for more reasons that The Beatles (who didn't crack the US until the year after)

― Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Tuesday, 17 February 2004 00:18 (twenty years ago) link

2004

I know some stuff about 2004, like I know the answer to the question "Who released "Talkie Walkie" in 2004?", for instance ;)

― Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Tuesday, 17 February 2004 00:19 (twenty years ago) link

From Motown through to Speed Garage I'm pretty solid. 98-2002 a bit of a blank spot, but picks up again after that...

― Jacob (Jacob), Tuesday, 17 February 2004 03:05 (twenty years ago) link

my musical knowledge is generally incomplete. you guys must all be really well informed!

― snd, Tuesday, 17 February 2004 03:12 (twenty years ago) link

"nothing happened between The Day The Music Died in 1959 and the Beatles landing in America'

Well, apart from Ray Charles, Sam Cooke and James Brown inventing soul music.

― LondonLee (LondonLee), Tuesday, 17 February 2004 03:15 (twenty years ago) link

Oh, and in that "70-76 black hole" you'll find a ton of great, non-turgid "soft rock" like David Bowie, Roxy Music, Bob Marley, T-Rex, Stevie Wonder etc. etc. etc.

― LondonLee (LondonLee), Tuesday, 17 February 2004 03:22 (twenty years ago) link

i'm good with 1940s-1980s. It starts to break down after about 1998.

― Orbit (Orbit), Tuesday, 17 February 2004 05:15 (twenty years ago) link

I can sort of bolster my knowledge via basic research but non-rap music in general from 1980 to about 1991 is sort of a blur for me, maybe because I grew up with it and didn't want to dig much further than the stuff I'd already been exposed to via radio/MTV ("Smiths? OK, uh, "How Soon Is Now". That'll be fine thanx"). My favorite album from 1981 is Fair Warning, which leads me to believe one of two things: my knowledge of post-post-punk-pre-synthpop is sorely lacking, or Van Halen fucking rules. Perhaps both.

― nate detritus (natedetritus), Tuesday, 17 February 2004 05:24 (twenty years ago) link

(I did wind up surprising myself with how much stuff on the '82 CDR Go! I realized was along my lines of interest so maybe that's a good sign)

― nate detritus (natedetritus), Tuesday, 17 February 2004 05:25 (twenty years ago) link

I'm alright going back to punk starting and before that I'm pretty piss poor. I think this is because I have a memory full of Menswear song titles and other things absorbed at age 15 or so which I have no use whatsoever for, and can't find space for good pre-77 music in there (with a few honorable exceptions).

― DJ Mencap (DJ Mencap), Tuesday, 17 February 2004 10:34 (twenty years ago) link

Not that I'm proposing anyone should do it, but perhaps this should be split by genre. It would be interesting to see the jumps people make ie a pretty common one would probably be something like:

PUNK: Nirvana/grunge/whoever got you interested, lead to 1976-1979, lead to 1973-1976, lead to 1961-1969 (although now you'd probably find people slotting post-punk in somewhere)

Or an interesting one would be 'blues': band that got you interested in music; Rolling Stones; 1950's; 60's revival; then moving back in time until you get to the Robert Johnson song that you already knew about because the Stones covered it.

― Jim Robinson (Original Miscreant), Tuesday, 17 February 2004 11:04 (twenty years ago) link

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.