This history of rock music is not a history of the charts (which I consider an aberration), but a history of the great ideas introduced by rock musicians over 50 years of relentless innovation, and the history of their greatest albums (regardless of how many copies were sold). It ends up being more focused on alternative rock than on mainstream rock, simply because alternaThis history of rock music is not a history of the charts (which I consider an aberration), but a history of the great ideas introduced by rock musicians over 50 years of relentless innovation, and the history of their greatest albums (regardless of how many copies were sold). It ends up being more focused on alternative rock than on mainstream rock, simply because alternative musicians tend to be more innovative and sincere than mainstream musicians. In a sense, rediscovering alternative rock and giving it its dues is also a way to restore the reputation of rock music among the more sophisticated audiences. Today, rock music is a genre that employs sampling techniques, electronic instruments, digital/computer technology, cacophony, and ethnic sources. The roots of today's rock music lie in the technical innovations brought about in the first half of the 20th century. Therefore, my alternative history of rock music begins much earlier than most books on the origins of rock'n'roll, and covers much more territory than guitar-driven rock'n'roll....
|Title||:||A History of Rock Music: 1951-2000|
|Number of Pages||:||553 Pages|
|Status||:||Available For Download|
|Last checked||:||21 Minutes ago!|
A History of Rock Music: 1951-2000 Reviews
Scaruffi's theory is that the only valuable music is that which pushes boundaries. He lists the best band "of all times" as Captain Beefheart. He lists two of the most overrated bands "of all times as The Beatles and Radiohead. He gushes after The Electric Prunes and Pere Ubu, but is disgusted with Cheap Trick and David Bowie.The book is fraught with copyediting errors, and it takes a real sort of concentration to move forward, as the format is at best unconventional. Scaruffi's book is useful to learn about new bands, but utterly frustrating in almost every other regard. At least he makes heavy use of lists, so if nothing else, you'll have something to compare your taste to. It's important to note that I disagree a great deal with his thesis and his opinions, so that could have an affect on my opinion of this book.Scaruffi's website, scaruffi.com, has a lot of the same information as this book, including his lists, his half-assed essays, and thoughts on other culture, as well as awful web design.
This book is poorly written and bristling with arrogance. However, I owe a great deal to Scaruffi for introducing me to some of my favorite rock albums. Just check out his lists on his website instead of reading this book.
I give credit to Scaruffi for really surging my fascination with studying the history of rock music. His "reviews" aren't really about whether or not albums were good at what they did, but more about their overall innovation and originality. I'm hard pressed to disagree with a lot of what he claims (other than his consistent downplaying of female musicians' importance, which probably the most problematic nature of his writings) and even in situations where I love an album he hates, his writing is so filled to the brim with analysis and critical thought that I'm forced to understand where he is coming from.He's pretentious, for sure, but he's introduced me to some absolutely unforgettable albums. Warning: this reads more like an encyclopedia of musicians and groups per era and scene, with intermittent narrative descriptions of the time and circumstances of said era (and descriptions of rock music's overall progression). Keep a notebook beside you, you'll wanna write some names down.