Who ruled the psych rock scene each decade?

>>73532153
As much as I hate his music, Tame Impala is definitely the 10s

>beatles
>psychadelic rock

>>73532195
I might agree but then again I think King Gizz is shaping up to take the throne

>>73532225
Don't split hairs man

>>73532153
60s: Beatles
70: Floyd
80s: In Britain: Kate Bush; In America: Talking Heads maybe? Sonic Youth?
90s: Early on: Sonic Youth; Later on: Radiohead
00s: AnCo
10s: Tame Impala
>>73532225
Dont start

80s: Psychedelic Furs
90s: Sonic Youth
10s: Tampa Impala

>>73532153

1980s.......Pere Ubu?
1990s.....maybe the Butthole Surfers?

>>73532153
80s was XTC

>>73532253
>>73532277
What about Spacemen 3/Spiritualized

>>73532253
>Radiohead, Kate Bush, Talking Heads, Sonic Youth
>psychedelic rock

>>73532251
>name best of a genre
>names band that isn't that genre
>someone points this out
>c'mon man don't be so pedantic

>>73532153
Probably:
80s: Spacemen 3
90s: Flaming Lips
10s: Tame Impala

File: sgt.png (345KB, 1046x369px) Image search: [Google]

345KB, 1046x369px

>>73532318
You're acting like it's so out there, as if I said they're a death metal band or some shit lol.

>>73532226
gizz is barely psych rock

1960s: Barrett-era Floyd
1970s: Can
1980s: Spacemen 3
1990s: Boredoms
2000s: Suishou no Fune

>>73532384
>doesn't understand how RYM genre voting system works
>still trusts genre labels of albums that have ratings from people who literally rate it and maybe 90 other albums and never use the site again

>10s
Haino/O'Rourke/Ambarchi trio

>>73532384
>rym is proof
lol

>>73532433
Oh good choice I'll add that to my list (>>73532413)

>>73532426
>>73532435
wow ur right

>>73532253
You might be retarded.

>10's
Rings of Saturn

>>73532481
It's not easy to point out the ruler of a genre in a time when that genre was beyond irrelevant. Do you go with who fits the genre better, or who war more popular? You can make an argument that every one of those artists was psychedelic in some way.
>>73532294
That's a better fit for 90s.
>>73532426
>>73532435
Psychedelic is such a badly described genre. That said, public consensus does matter for genre definitions considering the fact that they are socially accepted categorizations (that is, if a lot of people agree the Beatles are psych rock, they're fucking psych rock).

>>73532609
>public consensus does matter for genre definitions considering the fact that they are socially accepted categorizations (that is, if a lot of people agree the Beatles are psych rock, they're fucking psych rock).
no. ppl are idiots. see the american election

>>73532609
Genres can be used as socially defined categories or as academically defined categories. The latter definition is stricter and less self-fulfilling. If democratic consensus emerges because a major commercial force like the Beatles brand keeps insisting the band was on the cutting edge of the psychedelic (they weren't) or political zeitgeist of their time (they were borderline regressives whose song about revolution calls for it to not happen, yet it's always played under Vietnam protest reels?), that democratic consensus is marred. Better to default to people who have more experience with a range of music to keep genres useful as categories.

>>73532661
Also, anyone who thinks the Beatles are the best psych rock band of all time don't really want to explore more psych rock. They want more milquetoast RS shite, as evidenced by their insistence that Pink Floyd and Tame Impala are psychedelic wunderkinde

>>73532628
>le drumpf strawman
Doesn't matter, genres are literally subjectively defined:

>a category of artistic composition, as in music or literature, characterized by similarities in form, style, or subject matter.

Category
>a class or division of people or things regarded as having particular shared characteristics.

It's based on what people agree to fitting that genre.

>>73532661
Revolution calls for people to not be hypocrites when they ask for change- that's not regressive, it's just conservative, not the same thing.

Psychedelia has nothing to do with political revolution, it's just music inspired by psychedelic experiences. That's the definition. Experiecne is already subjective, so more than most genres, Psychedelia can be very loosely categorized.

>>73532684
>le drumpf strawman
im talking both hillary and trump being shit.


>It's based on what people agree to fitting that genre.
if those ppl were 5 yrs old sure. but people who are educated within the genre should be the only opinions that matter.

i know plenty of ppl who think jazz is just black classical.

>>73532680
Doesn't matter if people think they're the best psych rock band of all time- people regard them as psych rock.What is regarded as fine art (or best art) is not 1:1 with popularity. Genres however are defined by popular consensus.

Just stop being so autistic about it. Genres are not hard line defintiions, they're just suggestions that help epople know what to expect when they listen to a record. If someone told me the Beatles were psychedelic, I would agree with them after hearing something like Tomorrow Never Knows, Happiness is a Warm Gun, Revolution 9, Strawberry Fields Forever, or Lucy in the Sky.

>70's Floyd
>Pysch rock

Pink Floyd was PROG ROCK in the 70's. They only were Pysch in the 60's

>>73532748
>Genres however are defined by popular consensus.
no its defined by record labels trying to target a demographic so they can make more money $$$$$$$

yeah dude you like lsd. i got a band for you

the beatles are nothing more than a pop band.
this is psych rock https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvH2sHDrLsQ

>>73532730
You said stupidity in regards to the American election, not the American primaries. Election implies the vote for one candidate being a stupid vote, ergo you implied that people voting for Trump is what made them stupid.

Either way it's still a dumb meme/strawman to say that people are dumb because elections. Governments are dumb/corrupt, sure, but the people did nothing wrong. Most everyone hated both candidates because they were smart enough to realize they were shit.

>if those ppl were 5 yrs old sure. but people who are educated within the genre should be the only opinions that matter.
What qualifies as educated? How helpful is it to the public if a certain genre is defined a certain way that is incongruous with popular opinion?

It's just a social guide. It's entirely based on consensus, not hard definitions.

>>73532783
They have a say, but in the end it's based on what the public agrees to being x or y. They have less say than they ever have, unlike the 50s where you had Country, R+B, and Rock (for folk music, black music, and white music respectively).

>>73532748
Genres also are functional, though. if I liked Amon Düül II, most psychedelic rock would be a better match for my tastes than a weird album with Indian ragas, vaudeville showtunes, and one lite foray into reverb on vocals.

>>73532815
*all defined by Billboard* is what I meant in regards to the 50s.

>>73532796
>ergo you implied that people voting for Trump is what made them stupid.
where did i say trump in my original post?????

>Most everyone hated both candidates because they were smart enough to realize they were shit.
and yet nobody voted third party. yeah sounds like really SMART People


> How helpful is it to the public if a certain genre is defined a certain way that is incongruous with popular opinion?
the public doesn't know or care about music theory fuck them. I refuse to cater to them.

>>73532820
Being based on public consensus doesn't imply something isn't functional. Most of our language and cultural norms are just big agreements on what to call things and how to act around each other. Genres are the same way- people listen to stuff, then they listen to other stuff, and the match what sounds similar.

>>73532153
60's: Zappa or Pink Floyd
70's: Zeppelin?
80's: dead
90's: dead
00's: Animal Collective
10's: Gizzard or Impala

>>73532225
The Beatles reocrded a lot of psych rock and in many ways pioneered aspects of it. She Said She Said, Tomorrow Never Knows, Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds, It's All Too Much, Rain, etc.

>>73532852
>where did i say trump in my original post
If you couldn't follow the logic the first time then I don't really care about talking about it any longer.

>and yet nobody voted third party. yeah sounds like really SMART People
More people voted third party this election than any other in history, but at the end of the day, people know only two candidates can win,a dn they'll pick the lesser of two evils because, as it turns out, the President doesn't have all that much power anyway. Republicans will pick the Republicans; Democrats will pick the Democrat- they vote in the safe bet for their self interest. That is smart, even if the candidates are shittier than usual.

>the public doesn't know or care about music theory fuck them. I refuse to cater to them.
Then you're an elitist moron. Most critics and habitual music listeners don't have degrees in music theory, and you'd be lucky to find one that's taken more than one class on the subject. Doesn't mean those people can't discern the differences between things. People who listen to a lot of music and who play instruments are both more apt to dissecting and finding meaningful differences between pieces of music than someone who just learns the theory with no application. It's not helpful tot eh public to know that all of these songs end in a plagal cadence, but it is helpful to know that they all have distorted guitars and fast, blaring drums.

Hell, it's the reason genres are so functional- they require little/no theory to instantly grasp what they're describing.

>>73532948
*and they'll
because I can't type today.

>>73532783
>the beatles are nothing more than a pop band
>I browse a music board and yet have never listened to Tomorrow Never Knows
People like you are the reason why this board is shit. Just listen to the damn song.

>>73532948
>Most critics and habitual music listeners don't have degrees in music theory,
this is why majority all SUCK ASS.

> People who listen to a lot of music and who play instruments are both more apt to dissecting and finding meaningful differences between pieces of music than someone who just learns the theory with no application.
you realize somebody could learn theory and play instruments right????

>. It's not helpful tot eh public to know that all of these songs end in a plagal cadence,
again i could careless about them. they should have zero say in the matter.


>Then you're an elitist moron
im so glad you have to rely on personal insults to get your point across. class act chum!

>>73532986
>People like you are the reason why this board is shit. Just listen to the damn song.
ONE FUCKING SONG MAKES THEM A PSYCH ROCK BAND HOLY FUCKING SHIT ANON
DAMN I AM SO WRONG

>>73532855
You're missing my core point TNT at a certain level of market saturation, things carry labels because it is seen as hip for the time rather than useful. You're not addressing the core point that the Beatles don't sound like any other musicians from their era that were and are called psychedelic rock. You're just getting up your own ass that you passed your intro sociology class and assume I'm too stupid to understand prescriptivism. That's not what I'm doing. I'm identifying the need for intellectual categories to be insulated from pure total democracy lest they be diluted to the point of uselessness. But you just want to argue in platitudes because you're a moron / don't actually listen to psychedelic rock and are being defensive cause you think the Beatles count.

>>73532992
>this is why majority all SUCK ASS.
For you. For the vast majority of people they function fine.

>you realize somebody could learn theory and play instruments right
Never implied they couldn't My point was that someone who doesn't have 100 hours of theory can still describe music more than aptly. More to the point, most people will never take a music theory course, so genres that normal people can understand are more important than genres as defined by theory.

>again i could careless about them. they should have zero say in the matter.
Then you don't understand the point of genres.

>im so glad you have to rely on personal insults to get your point across. class act chum!
Wasn't an insult, it was a fact.

>>73532997
First of all, it's the most innovative psychedelic song ever recorded, and secondly they have tons of psych rock songs. You haven't actually listened to their albums, have you? You only know the singles.

>Strawberry Fields Forever
>Blue Jay Way
>I Am The Walrus
>Lucy in the Sky
>Happiness Is A Warm Gun
>Hey Bulldog
>It's All Too Much
>She Said She Said
>Rain
>A Day In The Life
>I Want To Tell You
>I'm Only Sleeping
>Being For The Benefit of Mr Kite

That's just the ones off the top of my head.

File: Screen Shot 2017-06-23 at 12.44.09 PM.png (259KB, 675x262px) Image search: [Google]

259KB, 675x262px

>>73533029
>For the vast majority of people they function fine.
again using the majority of ppl as your reasoning as why it matters idiotic. anyway this is boring and im going to end you using your own logic.

the beatles released 12 studio albums, 13 ep's in the 60s
prove to me that MAJORITY of their songs fit the psych rock label in that time frame.

you can start with proving to me With The Beatles and please please me fit under the psych rock label
>>73533059
same with you bud

> You haven't actually listened to their albums, have you?
pic related
have you?

>>73533080
Verify you email adress ffs

>>73533080
>His username is lilfudgeman

Kek can't say I'm surprised

1960's: The Jimi Hendrix Experience
1970's: I don't like Can, but Can
1980's: Spacemen 3
1990's: The Olivia Tremor Control
2000's: Panda Bear/AnCo
2010s: Tame Impala

>>73533059
>most innovative psychedelic song ever recorded

Are you shitting me? They just picked up ideas that Pierre Schaeffer was using in the Fucking '20s and had their producer walk them through making something that sounded kind of out there. It wasn't a major innovation on the level of most of Beefheart's or Jefferson Airplane's or Can's contributions (that is, experiments with tone and form that were unique to the genre and moved it forward rather than appropriating baby's first elements from 40-year-old avant-garde movements).

Tomorrow Never Knows is my favorite Beatles song, and they're among my most listened to bands. Fans like you are just insufferable prigs who insist that they're the best to make up for your ignorance of the genres they contributed to (well, Beatles were the best - why would I listen to anything but them and the insufferable copycats like Oasis and Tame Impala? no need to challenge myself if I watch enough VH1 documentaries! What the fuck is Fluxus? Fuck Yoko! Hurr)

>>73533059

kys

>>73533080
Listening to "1" on repeat doesn't count. If you knew the songs I listed you would consider them a psych rock band. On a side note, if you knew Helter Skelter, the first heavy metal song, you would not consider them merely pop.

60's: Beatles
70's: Pink Floyd
80's: Spacemen 3
90's: The Flaming Lips
00's: Animal Collective
10's: Tame Impala

>>73533026
>im so glad you have to rely on personal insults to get your point across. class act chum!
Not in every song sure. There are some Beatles songs that are almost in-arguably Psychedelic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDn5kBn3iaU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9muzyOd4Lh8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhYLz63csS0
Already there's a big diversity in what one can call psychedelic, but none of that sounds far off from Tomorrow Never Knows, Rain, Strawberry Fields, or Happiness is a Warm Gun.

>You're just getting up your own ass that you passed your intro sociology class and assume I'm too stupid to understand prescriptivism. That's not what I'm doing. I'm identifying the need for intellectual categories to be insulated from pure total democracy lest they be diluted to the point of uselessness.
Genres aren't intellectual categories, they're as you've described originally created as a marketing tool to help the public buy the records they knew they would like. Different genre definitions stem from different origin points, but in general they are just socially agreed upon classifications.

If you want to argue that there needs to be insulated genre definitions- independent form democracy- then you have to explain 1. What advantages does a forced description have over one that is socially generated and 2. what need there is for perfect intellectually created classifications for music.

Not sure why you went full sperg there desu.

>>73533123
>Listening to "1" on repeat doesn't count
>Y-you d-don't listen to The BEatles m-more than i do!!!!! Im the ultimate beatles fan

Seriously, consider hanging

>>73533123
Metal is part of pop music, you insufferable dunce. And if making some songs of one genre (not the majority of your songs) defines the entire genre of your band, I choose to see the Beatles as a vaudeville showtunes band whose biggest influence was on the show Glee.

>>73533112
>Beefheart, Jeff Airplane or Can could have recorded TMK in 66
all of my kek

>>73533141
I'm willing to allow this, but I want King Gizzard instead of Lame Impala!

>>73533168
Who said it defines the entire genre of the band? It doesn't. The Beatles covered a number of genres. But the argument being made is that the psych rock they did record, which there is plenty of, is the most significant psych rock of the 60s. That's what the thread is about.

>>73533080
>prove to me that MAJORITY of their songs fit the psych rock label in that time frame.
Why the hell does it have to be a majority? Hell, I wouldn't dare call them psych rock pre 1966, but there's enough peppered into their stuff from Rubber Soul onward that it'd be a disservice not to use the identifier.

I don't need to prove to you that all of their albums fit the label because many don't. But considering that their most revered albums are very clearly psychedelic in big parts, it'd be retarded to say they weren't a psych band for the most relevant part of their career.

>again using the majority of ppl as your reasoning as why it matters idiotic. anyway this is boring and im going to end you using your own logic.
You haven't explained why it's idotic. I have explained to you why it's helpful.

>>73533149
You're taking to two people. I'm the intellectual categories guy. I've already described the problem - Amon Düül II listeners will be better served by literally anything in the actual genre of psychedelic rock than Sgt Pepper. Genres also are corrupted by commercial influences that can insist that certain bands were first or best through historical revisionism. The Beatles are massively overrated because they broadcast themselves once every few years in some anniversary special as being the most important thing to ever happen to music. Genres are a category originally created by music theorists (academic pursuit, not commercial) and used now by ethnomusicologists (another academic pursuit). It's a new challenge that commercial music and unqualified critics have diluted the discussion so far, and that has led to homogenization of many rock genres. Think of the fact that there's ten revival bands out there emulating the Beatles calling themselves prog rock for every one that's trying to make actual new psychedelic rock music adapting the energy and sound of the '60s and '70s to the current cultural moment (one also plagued by drug abuse and political nihilism)

>>73533141
This is the correct answer

>>73533171
Frank Zappa made Lumpy Gravy in '66. He was close friends and collaborators with Beefheart. If the latter hadn't been more focused on re-synthesizing free jazz and blues music across a canvas of demented and chaotic rock music, he could have easily pursued such a path. He was one of the best rock composers ever.

80s: XTC
90s: Flaming Lips

>>73533192
If they keep pumping out records like they have been, they'll definitely will. I personally just think nothing they've released is better than Lonerism.

>>73532153
>00's: Animal Collective
That's a strange way to spell The Mars Volta

>>73533104
This except I like Can

>>73533245
>The Beatles are massively overrated because they broadcast themselves once every few years in some anniversary special as being the most important thing to ever happen to music
>the fact that

But anyway, on to your real points:
>Amon Düül II listeners will be better served by literally anything in the actual genre of psychedelic rock than Sgt Pepper.
Why? Do you not think people who like Amon Duul II wouldn't like Sgt. Pepper? Certainly they are different, but that's why I think most poeple categorize Amon Duul II as Krautrock. I think listeners would be better off hearing Neu! or Faust or Can over any other Psych Rock band. I'm not sure the Amon Duul II listener is any worse off hearing Sgt. Pepper as he is listening to Days of Future Past or Forever Changes.

>Genres are a category originally created by music theorists (academic pursuit, not commercial) and used now by ethnomusicologists (another academic pursuit).
The problem here is that music was originally an entirely academic pursuit, reserved for the wealthy and the learned. IN a world where anyone with a laptop can create music, the pursuit of music becomes more than just academics. Genres are the same way.

>Think of the fact that there's ten revival bands out there emulating the Beatles calling themselves prog rock for every one that's trying to make actual new psychedelic rock music adapting the energy and sound of the '60s and '70s to the current cultural moment (one also plagued by drug abuse and political nihilism)
I'm not sure why this is a problem. If they're calling themselves prog rock and people agree that they're prog rock, then no one is hurt. If they call themselves prog rock and no one agrees that they're prog rock, then they're just retarded.

>Genres also are corrupted by commercial influences that can insist that certain bands were first or best through historical revisionism.
One publication changing it's mind about something isn't historical revisionism.

>>73532226
We don't give enough credit to I'm Only Sleeping which might be my favorite psych rock song ever

>>73533274
>He could easily have done it
Well he didn't, and The Beatles did. I do like Zappa but I find the pretension in his music hard to deal with sometimes.

>>73532628
Wow you are stupid

>>73533397
>muh dick when that bass fill between verses

File: Revolver.jpg (75KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 300x300px

>>73533397>>73533482

This is why Revolver is objectively the best psych rock album of all time.

>>73532326
u forgot a decade there buddy

>>73532303
The dreaming is probably a psych pop record.

>>73532870
Zappa and Led Zepellin have almost nothing to do with the state of psych rock in the 70's and 60's.

File: 1470209544713-2.png (61KB, 480x371px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 480x371px

>>73532730
>im talking both hillary and trump being shit.

>>73532870
kys

>no brainticket or psychonauts
fuck off plebs

Arcade Fire is prog.

>>73532413
How did only one person in this thread actually list all psychedelic rock bands in their response

>>73532661
>>73532712
its a scarufffi pasta

>>73533421
Your argument was that none of them could have made it. You can't just move the goal post. And as I said before, George Martin, not the Beatles, contributed most to that song

>>73537855
No, I wrote that out you Beatles cuck.

>>73532153
really i would say the Greatful dead should be 60's

>>73532153
I'd put the Doors over the Beatles, and Acid Mothers over Anco.

>>73532433
Hey my last name is O'Rourke! Neat

OP said who ruled, not who do you like best you pretentious fucks

>>73532413

I'd substitute Acid Mothers Temple for the 2000s but congrats on having the only accurate list

File: 1479681442439.png (43KB, 230x230px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 230x230px

>>73532870

>being this much of a pleb