taking sides: US version vs. UK version of the first Clash album

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
it's nice of the record company to make both readily available, but the choice leaves me in indecision. i know this happened a lot back then (i.e. the bizarre cuts made on early Elvis Costello albums before they made it to the US), but is there any particular history to the 2 different running order/selections? which one is preferred by members of the band? what are the pros and cons of each?

al, Sunday, 14 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

new "oi, mate!" answers

al, Sunday, 14 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Been there, done that (& mark s lays down the lore on punx0r!)

Ess Kay, Sunday, 14 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

haha nate will hate me now!

mark s, Sunday, 14 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Can someone explain this "xOr" business to me please?
And how come nobody voiced this definition?:
Ramones, Clash, Pistols = not punk = punk-ROCK! (punks would not cover Phil Spector or Chuck Berry)
punk = GBH, The Exploited = bands that only real punks give a shit about, not music nerds like us
Rock'n'roll was invented before rock, punk-rock was invented before punk, hardcore punk was invented before hardcore, and hardcore techno was invented before ardkore. It was a matter of eliminating the roll, the rock, the punk, and the techno. (& the 'n' & the h & the c) Oh yeah, let's not forget hythm & lues. Purification, baby.

Keith McD, Monday, 15 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)


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