What was your first impression of "Beat It" by Michael Jackson?

[chidrummer]

oh BTW, the drummer in that Archie Bell & The Drells video is a very young Frankie Donaldson who still lives here in Chicago, teaches at Columbia University and rocks some serious tabla with Corky Siegel.

[timmyfunk]

I too bought Thriller within days of it's release. The LP was released Nov. 30 [[ the usual Tuesday release day) so I'm quite sure i bought it in early December of '82. The single, The Girl is Mine was already on the radio. Didn't think much of that tune, but to me that rarely means the LP can't be good so I picked it up.

I tend to like ballads so I loved, The Lady in My Life from the get go. To me, it was better than, Push Me Away and way better than She's Out of My Life [[a tad corny). The second song that got my attention was, Beat It.

I think we've all forgotten how edgy that song was in 1982. Apart from Funkadelic you just didn't hear black folks recording loud rock and roll tracks. EVH was instantly recognizable on that solo. The tapping, the hammer on's, it's all there and song goes to another level. Yeah, if Mike Hampton, Eddie Hazel or Drac, for that matter, had done the solo it would have been different, it would have put that guitarist way into mainstream awareness. I honestly don't think MJ or Q thought about it that long. Van Halen was super hot at the time. I wouldn't at all surprised if it was simply a matter of "we need rock guitar solo here, let's see if we can get Eddie Van Halen to do it." Vernon Reid would have been an excellent choice except that hardly anyone knew who he was aside from some very hip New Yorkers.

Anyway, I think EVH was a great choice. He's said in several interviews that if he had known the record was going to be that famous he would have played a better solo. Now what would THAT have sounded like?

I can totally see where you're coming from Chi. But I also add Black Merda and perhaps Mother's Finest to that list.

I have to say that my feeelings about Thriller really haven't changed all that much. I still wouldn't buy the album today if given the choice. EVH a great choice? I don't know about that. A shrewd choice, definitely.

[Jerry Oz]

Vernon Reid would have been an excellent choice except that hardly anyone knew who he was aside from some very hip New Yorkers.

I'm probably the only Living Colour fan who is not a big fan of Vernon Reid's solos. I love his rhythm work and how he can amp a song to 11 on a 10 point scale, but I find most of his solos kind of gratuitous and missing something in their composition. I hate to say that, too. It just seems like if he played the same song in consecutive sets on the same night, the second solo would be unrecognizable from the one played previously. I guess I'm a bad fan...

[juicefree20]

I remember it as though it were yesterday...

On the day that "Thriller" came out, I had to play all of the sessions at the skating rink that day, afternoon, evening & the late session. Before I went there, I did my usual record shopping across the street at The Wiz on Jamaica & what was then New York Blvd.

As I didn't want to preview the LP so that everyone could hear it, I previewed it through my headphones & to be honest the only songs that really jumped out at me were 'Billie Jean, Wanna Be Startin' Something, Thriller, The Girl Is Mine & The Lady In My Life. Baby Be Mine grew on me but to this day, I've never gotten into P.Y.T. As for Beat It, I didn't like it then & I don't like it now. It's likely one of my feast favorite M.J. songs ever, dating back to his J5 days.

It's just a little too Rock for my taste, a little too frantic for any of the crowds that I've ever played for & while true that Funkadelic, The Isleys & others had some bad azzed guitar solos on more than a few classics, they also came with a degree of Funk which made it palatable for me & my crowd[[s).

To illustrate what I mean, simply listen to the solos on "That Lady", ''Slide" or "One Nation Under A Groove" & FEEL the difference between all of the elements of those songs, as compared to "Beat It". Those other songs simply groove & there's simply so much more to appreciate than a guitar solo.

I always thought that "Beat It" was aimed at catching the ear of Rock radio & if so, then I'd have to say that it was successful. I guess that it just wasn't my cup of tea as I prefer rhythmic elements over screaming guitars.

[Jerry Oz]

CBS threatened to pull their records off of MTV for not playing MJ records. Their excuse was that his music wasn't rock, so perhaps that is why "Beat It" was specifically put on the record and EVH was asked to participate. "Billie Jean" was actually the first video to break and his charisma led to those walls coming down on the network. As for classic solos in "black" music, "Voyage to Atlantis" is probably my favorite all-time favorite. Also, Drac's solo on "Stellar Fungk" was as much rock as anything that Van Halen ever played in the '80s. I'm not sure who played the solo on "Let Me Put Love On Your Mind" by Con Funk Shun [[Michael Cooper? Felton Pilate?) but that thing laid that song out.

[soulster]

It ain't about color. It's about recognition, something that is in short order for many musicians in the so-called 'Black Rock' genre. Look, I don't need the NAACP-type speech about racial equality. In this particular case, I just feel that there were many Black Rock guitarists that could have done that solo just as good if not better than EVH. Stop acting like you need to get on a soap box to make your point. Jeez...

You must be getting defensive for some reason, but i'm not getting on any soapbox. But, from my POV, i'm seeing a little militancy. If i'm wrong, let me know. No insult intended! I'm just telling you what i'm reading in this discussion, how it looks to someone who doesn't know you guys very well. I'm hearing all these names like Eddie Hazel, Ernie Isley, and Vernon Reid...it reminds me of the scene in the movie "Do The Right Thing" where the guy was sitting in an Italian-owned pizza place and complaining that all the pictures on the wall were Italian and none were Black, even though the place was in a predominantly Black neighborhood.

[soulster]

CBS threatened to pull their records off of MTV for not playing MJ records. Their excuse was that his music wasn't rock, so perhaps that is why "Beat It" was specifically put on the record and EVH was asked to participate. "Billie Jean" was actually the first video to break and his charisma led to those walls coming down on the network.

The way it happened is that, since 1982, Rick James had been complaining that MTV wouldn't play his "Super Freak" video. He, of course, got nowhere because Bop Pittman, the founder and then president of MTV, stated that White kids from the suburbs didn't want to see black faces. Clearly, he was feeding into their racism. So, several months later, when "Billie Jean" was at the top of the Black Hot 100 chart, CBS submitted it to the music channel. They refused it on the basis that it wasn't a rock record, even when it was pointed out that they played other videos that weren't exactly rock. Then, they submitted "Beat It" and they still refused. So, Walter Yetnikof threatened to pull all CBS videos, which included Journey, The Clash, Men At Work, Billy Joel, Judas Priest, Scandal, Elvis Costello, Loverboy, Kansaas, among scores of others. Only then did they back down.

But, Van Halen was not asked to play on the record because of any calculated move. I suspect it was simply that MJ liked the band, and Eddie was the first name that popped up in his head. He also lived in the area.

[timmyfunk]

You must be getting defensive for some reason, but i'm not getting on any soapbox. But, from my POV, i'm seeing a little militancy. If i'm wrong, let me know. No insult intended! I'm just telling you what i'm reading in this discussion, how it looks to someone who doesn't know you guys very well. I'm hearing all these names like Eddie Hazel, Ernie Isley, and Vernon Reid...it reminds me of the scene in the movie "Do The Right Thing" where the guy was sitting in an Italian-owned pizza place and complaining that all the pictures on the wall were Italian and none were Black, even though the place was in a predominantly Black neighborhood.

Dude, you're over reading it.
Look, my heart and mind are somewhere else right now. Another member of the P-Funk family has passed on. That is where my attention is at this point. If you want to frame my posts as militant, fine. I don't have the time to explain.

[juicefree20]

The bottom line is that Michael wanted to be the king of Rock, Pop & Soul. Having the R&B/Soul & Pop markets already recognizing him, I believe that the choice of Van Halen was a grab at the MTV crowd & the rockers. To be honest about it, back in 1982, most "urban'' [[read BLACK) areas in New York WERE NOT wired for cable. Our neighborhoods were designated as the last to be wired for "Pay TV" i.e cable.

Most of the Blacks whom I knew here in New York [[myself included) only had access to WHT if we/they were lucky. So to us, MTV wasn't an issue & frankly, no...we DIDN'T want our MTV & for obvious reasons.

But for an entertainer seeking more mainstream recognition, it was a no-brainer.

One other thought...as a DJ & serious R&B/Club music purchaser, I recall that during the 80s. most labels WERE NOT trying to get Rock hits on their Black acts. Hell, Prince & his camp already had that sewed up. What they were doing was placing airbrushed, mascara laden pictures of Lionel Richie, George Benson, Ready For The World & God knows whom else on LP covers in order to TRY to get those elusive POP hits, because they already conceded the fact that after that whole "Disco Sucks" episode of a few years earlier, that most of the Rock crowd was never going to go for a bunch of black guys & gals suddenly attempting to cross over to Rock.

After all, most of them were the very artists whom they were railing about all along & they had a snowball in hell's chance of ever being accepted by the Rock crowd. Unfortuantely a simple glance at the Billboard charts will easily bear this fact out. And a lot of those R&B acts ended up losing their crowds after chasing that elusive Pop hit. A couple of examples...folks like Atlantic Starr, George Benson & even Lionel Richie lost large chunks of their R&B audience when they went courting those Pop hits. And if memory serves me correctly, wasn't it Lionel's penchant for writing Pop hits & nothing but Pop hits that led to the break-up of one of the funkiest bands that has ever come down the pike?

And let's not forget that it was around this time that the charts became VERY segregated. The 60s & even early-to-mid 70s were far more integrated than that specific time period. In fact, it seems to me as though Rap & Rap hybrids of what passes for "R&B" today, has played a large part in the charts of the last 10 -15 years to be as desegregated as they are currently.

Not even "Thriller" had the kind of effect. Perhaps Michael & Lionel Richie crossed over, but when they did, it's not like they dragged George Benson or The Brothers Johnson through the doors with them.

Many are called...few are chosen.

[Jerry Oz]

The way it happened is that, since 1982, Rick James had been complaining that MTV wouldn't play his "Super Freak" video. He, of course, got nowhere because Bop Pittman, the founder and then president of MTV, stated that White kids from the suburbs didn't want to see black faces. Clearly, he was feeding into their racism. So, several months later, when "Billie Jean" was at the top of the Black Hot 100 chart, CBS submitted it to the music channel. They refused it on the basis that it wasn't a rock record, even when it was pointed out that they played other videos that weren't exactly rock. Then, they submitted "Beat It" and they still refused. So, Walter Yetnikof threatened to pull all CBS videos, which included Journey, The Clash, Men At Work, Billy Joel, Judas Priest, Scandal, Elvis Costello, Loverboy, Kansaas, among scores of others. Only then did they back down.

But, Van Halen was not asked to play on the record because of any calculated move. I suspect it was simply that MJ liked the band, and Eddie was the first name that popped up in his head. He also lived in the area.

Thanks for clarifying it for me! "Billie Jean" and Michael Jackson gave MTV new relevance. It's almost funny that America was ready for crossover artists and had they not seen the error of their ways [[begrudgingly), the network would not have grown in the manner or speed that it did. I remember when the only place I could watch black artists on television was on "Video Soul" with Donnie Simpson.

[soulster]

Dude, you're over reading it.
Look, my heart and mind are somewhere else right now. Another member of the P-Funk family has passed on. That is where my attention is at this point. If you want to frame my posts as militant, fine. I don't have the time to explain.

Dude, please re-read my post. I was simply telling you how I interpreted yours, and a couple of others' posts. Like I said, no insult was ever intended. It's just a discussion, not a war. We don't have to agree on this stuff. I hope we can discuss other things without the hostility, mis-characterizations, and misunderstandings.

[Jerry Oz]

It's just conversation, y'all. I think the discussion was cool, so let's not devolve into something negative.

[soulster]

To be honest about it, back in 1982, most "urban'' [[read BLACK) areas in New York WERE NOT wired for cable. Our neighborhoods were designated as the last to be wired for "Pay TV".

Most of the Blacks whom I knew here in New York [[myself included) only had access to WHT if we/they were lucky. So to us, MTV wasn't an issue & frankly, no...we DIDN'T want our MTV & for obvious reasons.

But foran entertainer seeking more mainstream recognition, it was a no-brainer.

I grew up in the west, and we had cable since 1969. Our cable system didn't get MTV until January 2 of 1984, so I did not really care until then. I watched Night Tracks and other music video shows before that point, and even they didn't play many R&B videos. I got all of my music before that from radio and my own purchases. but, I always followed the chart action.

One other thought...as a DJ & serious R&B/Club music purchaser, I recall that during the 80s. most labels WERE NOT trying to get Rock hits on their Black acts. Hell, Prince & his camp already had that sewed up. What they were doing was placing airbrushed, mascara laden pictures of Lionel Richie, George Benson, Ready For The World & God knows whom else in order to get those elusive POP hits, because they already conceded the fact that after that whole "Disco Sucks" episode of a few years earlier, that most of the Rock crowd was never going to go for a bunch of black guys & gals suddenly attempting to cross over to Rock.

That's right. All those labels and producers were concerned with getting pop songs. Some of them came close to rock, but they had to keep their Black base. Dick Griffey stated that his intention for Shalamar's "Dead Giveaway" was to deliberately get the pop audiences. DeBarge's music was deliberately pop to grab the pop audiences.

And let's not forget that it was around this time that the charts became VERY segregated. The 60s & even early-to-mid 70s were far more integrated than that specific time period. In fact, it seems to me as though Rap & Rap hybrids of what passes for "R&B" today, has played a large part in the charts of the last 10 -15 years to be as desegregated as they are currently.

Well, that happened in late 1980, after disco was beaten back into the ghetto and underground clubs.

Not even "Thriller" had the kind of effect. Perhaps Michael & Lionel Richie crossed over, but when they did, it's not like they dragged George Benson or The Brothers Johnson through the doors with them.

In the 80s, George Benson did have one big hits across the board hit, like "Turn Your Love Around" in 1982, but after 1980, The Brothers Johnson were pretty much over on the pop chart. Denise Williams tried, but was largely unsuccessful in repeating her 1977 hit "Free" until "Let's Hear It For The Boy", which was all pop. Al Jarreau came from a jazz background, but he does count, as he moved further toward R&B in the 80s. Record labels pushed Black artists to go pop.

[soulster]

Thanks for clarifying it for me! "Billie Jean" and Michael Jackson gave MTV new relevance. It's almost funny that America was ready for crossover artists and had they not seen the error of their ways [[begrudgingly), the network would not have grown in the manner or speed that it did. I remember when the only place I could watch black artists on television was on "Video Soul" with Donnie Simpson.

Americans were buying both R&B and rock records. Rick James pointed this out in his public complaint against MTV, too. I was buying both. Pittman was catering to the only demographic he knew, racist people like him. He was the one who needed to be dragged into the modern age.

[juicefree20]

Soulster

Cable since 1969?

Man, you guys were fortunate. The powers-that-be here in N.Y. didn't finish wiring some of our areas until the 90's, damn near a decade after more moneyed folks in Manhattan had been enjoying cable. We had WHT which only showed the programming that they had & not exactly the most timely movies, at that.

Then, we got a lot of fly-by-night operators that came & went just like those cable rental stores that offered us "lifetime" memberships. They just didn't say WHOSE lifetime.

I digress...

Indeed, a few did get those elusive Pop hits. For example, Deniece Williams had to have had one of the unlikeliest Pop hits with "Let's Hear It For The Boy". And it's no coincidence that it just happened to be part of one of the pivotal scenes in the movie "Footloose". And let's not forget Shalamar's "Dancing In The Sheets" from the same movie, not to mention [[please, let's not) "Don't Get Stopped In Beverly Hills" from the "Beverly Hills Cop" soundtrack.

Just as with Disco, indeed, many labels requested their artists to create more Pop-oriented music. But just as with Jackie Wilson, Sam Cooke & others, there were some artists whom actively sought it on their own [[i.e Lionel Richie).

But I would say that with the exception of a select few, of those R&B acts whom sought out Pop success & found success, the overwhelming majority had maybe a couple of hits, then were quickly shown the door back to Mickey D Island. Their success was a dalliance, a momentary novelty perhaps, but nothing meant for longevity. And I believe that the record will show that the vast majority of them never enjoyed the same type of R&B success that they had previously enjoyed. Meanwhile those like Frankie Beverly & Maze, The Whispers & Teena Marie whom proudly continued to make unabashed R&B music continued to enjoy success, so much so that they could continue to sell out arenas even without the benefit of having a current release.

For most, the words of this great American have proven to be all too true...

"Crossover ain't nothin' but a double cross" - J.T. Matthews [[The Five Heartbeats)

[juicefree20]

Soulster & Jerry Oz

I don't know how to do the quote thingy just yet, but do either of you find it to be somewhat ironic that when you consider the early days of Rock & Roll [[when all of those priests & parents were warning against the "Devil's music") when Whites AND Blacks bought, listened to & danced to this music, that things would've regressed to the extent that they did from the 80s forward?

Furthermore, isn't it more than a little ironic that a genre which evolved from Black R&B & Rockabilly, somehow became the province of White males & females & screaming guitar solos?

Somehow, I don't believe that this is what Little Richard, Jerry Lee Lewis, Eddie Cochran, Buddy Holly, The Treniers nor The Big Bopper had in mind.

So...what in the hell happened to Rock & Roll & how was it taken over?!?!?

[soulster]

Soulster & Jerry Oz

I don't know how to do the quote thingy just yet, but do either of you find it to be somewhat ironic that when you consider the early days of Rock & Roll [[when all of those priests & parents were warning against the "Devil's music") when Whites AND Blacks bought, listened to & danced to this music, that things would've regressed to the extent that they did from the 80s forward?

Furthermore, isn't it more than a little ironic that a genre which evolved from Black R&B & Rockabilly, somehow became the province of White males & females & screaming guitar solos?

Somehow, I don't believe that this is what Little Richard, Jerry Lee Lewis, Eddie Cochran, Buddy Holly, The Treniers nor The Big Bopper had in mind.

So...what in the hell happened to Rock & Roll & how was it taken over?!?!?

Well, someone mentioned it earlier in the thread. Someone complained that these topics usually get into racism, but that is the only thing I see that caused all this division of the music and it's audiences.

When the Brits came here and put a new twist on the blues, it attracted White kids because the British were White, and they could identify with them. They were a little safer. The music was a couple of layers of that "jungle" rhythm removed too. That was the first split. The second was disco, and we don't have to again get into why that was hated by so many people. The third split occurred with the emergence of gangsta rap. Each popular "Black" musical form drove more and more Whites away. By the same, Blacks fled these rock forms too. It once again became a case of racial identification through music. What other reason but race could there be?

[juicefree20]

Soulster,

I hear you but I have to admit that I never gave much thought as to how everything deviated. But when I thought about the TRUE origins of what is categorized as Rock, given the history of the MUSIC, I simply don't understand how we made the leap from Little Richard to Guns & Roses.

[chidrummer]

I'll try take a stab at that one. In a few words, we gave it up.

By 1960 Chuck Berry, Bo Diddley and Little Richard had already released most of the hits they would ever have.
Chuck was in jail, Richard temporarily quit the music business and Bo was back on the chitlin' circuit. Even Elvis was
in the Army.

The charts were ruled by the likes Fabian, Frankie Avalon, Dion, Neil Sedaka, Connie Francis, etc. The Blues was persona non grata and Muddy Waters, Howlin Wolf, Buddy Guy, et al were all scuffling for the few club gigs still left in Chicago. Only Ike Turner was still producing and touring regularly.

So then what happen? The Brits brought us our own music back! The Beatles were heavily influenced by Berry, Richard, Arthur Alexander and early Motown. The Stone were trying their level best to be a Chicago Blues Band. The Kinks, The Yardbirds and even The Who all had Blues and R&B roots. That's were the transition is made. Black folks were celebrating and making stars out of singing groups - The Impressions, The Dells, The Temps, The Four Tops, etc.

The bands came a bit later - Booker T & the MG's, the original Bar-kays. As the sound turns from soul to Funk Sly & The Family Stone hit. James Brown comes more to the fore. Clinton breaks it wide open and suddenly there are bands everywhere. But the sound is about the drums and bass, not so much the guitars. This is the main disconnect that occurs in the 60's. To oversimplify to make the point, Rock & Roll is known for its songwriting and guitar players. R&B is known for it's grooves and singers.

[soulster]

Soulster,

I hear you but I have to admit that I never how everything deviated. But when I thought about the TRUE origins of what is categorized as Rock, given the history of the MUSIC, I simply don't understand how we made the leap from Little Richard to Guns & Roses.

The British and American rockers of the 60s expanded on what people Like Chuck Berry and the blues greats did, melded them into a music that emphasized prominent distorted guitars.

I am fortunate to have been exposed to all kinds of music and appreciate them.

[soulster]

So then what happen? The Brits brought us our own music back! The Beatles were heavily influenced by Berry, Richard, Arthur Alexander and early Motown. The Stone were trying their level best to be a Chicago Blues Band. The Kinks, The Yardbirds and even The Who all had Blues and R&B roots. That's were the transition is made. Black folks were celebrating and making stars out of singing groups - The Impressions, The Dells, The Temps, The Four Tops, etc.

There ya go! in the early to mid-60s, the music just started going in different directions. But, while R&B, then soul, was a steady progression from what we had in the 40s and 50s, the pop crowd had a rebirth of rock & roll with the British Invasion that included The Dave Clark Five, The Rolling Stones, The Yardbirds, and, of course, The Beatles. There were also American bands,that included zillions of garage bands like Paul Revere & The Raiders, and "surfer bands" from the west coast like Jan & Dean, The Ventures, and The Beach Boys. Again, race was an issue. Most of the new-breed bands were White, most R&B singers were Black. It's still the 60s, and we still had Jim Crow and the civil rights struggles. Though people bought records from each other's groups, people still mainly listened to the music of the respective race. Again, racial identification. There is always a degree of intermingling, of course. It seems the racial intermingling still worked more in one direction than the other, though. Blacks have always been more willing to listen to White artists, even if it is pop, rock, or country, but fewer Whites, overall, would listen to anything by a Black artist, or music of Black culture.

[Jerry Oz]

I'm missing something. By the '70s, popular music went two very different directions: R&B became 100% rhythm AND blues with soul music from the O'Jays, Spinners, Harold Melvin, etc. creating what to me is quintessentially black music [[my favorite era for any music) and rock went toward what is considered AM music with Foreigner, Steely Dan, Aerosmith, Heart, etc. Neither of these types of music was in anyway similar to each other. Then, the '80s came about and it was either a great age or an abomination, depending upon who recollects it. There were synthesizers and Linn drum kits on almost everything, nearly eliminating the need for a band. There was very little R&B or rock created in the '80s as far as I'm concerned. It was some sort of electronic poppy groove music that was told from different perspectives but "white" music and "black" music was essentially the same for the most part [[with the exception of punk and hair bands).

Then, there was the '90s. There was an unspoken rebellion in the '90s and people picked up guitars and got angry. Rock became grunge and 80 other types of angry noise [[no disrespect intended by "noise", BTW). But R&B never really came back. Few were playing memorable bass lines or singing soul anymore. Jodeci stood out as a great soul outfit to me because there were so few soul outfits. Boyz II Men blew up for an album but got lost in their success. I stopped listening to popular radio right about then. Now, there is mostly noise in black music [[disrespect intended by "noise"). There are samples from a greater time and clear bastardization of what came before. It's more about how to shock and awe than it is to entertain. We traded Chaka Khan for Nikki Minaj? Really? I know things have to change, but I don't like the direction that black music took in general beginning in the '80s.

[soulster]

I'm missing something. By the '70s, popular music went two very different directions: R&B became 100% rhythm AND blues with soul music from the O'Jays, Spinners, Harold Melvin, etc. creating what to me is quintessentially black music [[my favorite era for any music) and rock went toward what is considered AM music with Foreigner, Steely Dan, Aerosmith, Heart, etc. Neither of these types of music was in anyway similar to each other. Then, the '80s came about and it was either a great age or an abomination, depending upon who recollects it. There were synthesizers and Linn drum kits on almost everything, nearly eliminating the need for a band. There was very little R&B or rock created in the '80s as far as I'm concerned. It was some sort of electronic poppy groove music that was told from different perspectives but "white" music and "black" music was essentially the same for the most part [[with the exception of punk and hair bands).

I maintain that the split started in the mid-60s, not the 70s.

You must mean that rock in the 70s went to FM music, not AM. Actually, there were a lot of pop radio stations on the FM band too by about 1973, with Black radio not far behind.

It was late 60s that rock acts like Emerson, Lake, & Palmer, Crosby, Stills & Nash, Alice Cooper, Deep Purple, Led Zeppelin, Fleetwood Mac, and Yes emerged, but, many times, bands from that period had a lot of R&B influence. Even later bands like Foreigner had R&B influences. But, that influence went away in the late 70s when punk became popular on the East Coast and in L.A..

The reason R&B resorted to using technology i the 80s was because of two main reasons: It was a new sound, and record label budgets were slashed, and it was R&B artists that took the hit as a result of the recession and the disco backlash. In the early 80s, Rock, and almost everyone else, were trying to run away as far from anything Black as possible.

Then, there was the '90s. There was an unspoken rebellion in the '90s and people picked up guitars and got angry. Rock became grunge and 80 other types of angry noise [[no disrespect intended by "noise", BTW). But R&B never really came back.

R&B was always there. The soul survivors just didn't get major deals anymore. They were on small, indie labels like Malaco and Ichban. The rest of soul got co-opted by hip-hop. It was still R&B, but it was combined with hip-hop by the new generation that was coming up. The older cats fould it hard to relate to it, which is why many of them say R&B died. Unfortunately, it was all beats now. The rhythm bass line had gone away.

[Jerry Oz]

Good Lord. That makes me an "older cat". I'm aware that everything must change. But I can't help but miss the days when I could tell who was playing the bass on some records just by hearing the song. And forgive me for over-generalizing. Luther Vandross, Regina Belle, Anita Baker, Frankie Beverly, Jeffrey Osborne, and many others still carried the standard for years, but it seemed like they got lost in the changing times. I just miss R&B, I guess.

[timmyfunk]

Dude, please re-read my post. I was simply telling you how I interpreted yours, and a couple of others' posts. Like I said, no insult was ever intended. It's just a discussion, not a war. We don't have to agree on this stuff. I hope we can discuss other things without the hostility, mis-characterizations, and misunderstandings.

Then let's drop it. My mind is wrapped around the loss of a vital P-Funk member, as well as a dear friend and big sister. Interpret whatever you want.

[roger]

Hello folks .. here is an outsiders point of view from Merry Olde England ..

I maintain that the split started in the mid-60s, not the 70s.

I'd say the pivotal year was 1967 .. even as late as 1965/66 a lot of [[what were to become) "Rock" acts were recording music that was noticably "R&B" based, and featured very syncopated rhythms .. I'm thinking of tracks like "Gimme Some Loving" by SPENCER DAVIS or "Paint It Black" by THE ROLLING STONES here .. plus one-offs like "96 Tears" by ? & THE MYSTERIONS. These records seemed just as aimed at the dance floor as anything being produced by Motown, Stax etc.

In 1967 I would say there were two major trends that changed this .. firstly the California/San Francisco based "hippie" movement, and "Sergeant Pepper" by THE BEATLES .. both of which were somewhat fuelled by illicit drugs such as LSD or Marijuana and which introduced people to music that was a lot more introspective and therefore people who were attracted by this kind of music tended to sit down and dissect the meaning of the lyrics and marvel at the technical wizardry of the musicians [[whether it actually sounded good or not is a matter of personal opinion).

It was late 60s that rock acts like Emerson, Lake, & Palmer, Crosby, Stills & Nash, Alice Cooper, Deep Purple, Led Zeppelin, Fleetwood Mac, and Yes emerged, but, many times, bands from that period had a lot of R&B influence. Even later bands like Foreigner had R&B influences. But, that influence went away in the late 70s when punk became popular on the East Coast and in L.A..

Well, yes!! However there was a lot of R&B/Pop crossover occuring in the other direction and if I look at the Billboard charts I can see that well into the mid '70s a top 10 showing on the "Black"/R&B charts virtually guaranteed a Top 30 placing [[at least) on the Hot-100 "Pop" chart .. The drifting away of "Black" music from the U.S. "Pop" mainstream actually seems to predate the "Disco Sucks" nonsense of 1979. I believe that the first R&B #1 in 20 years that failed to crack the Billboard Hot 100 was actually "Turning Point" by TYRONE DAVIS in 1976.

One thing to take ointo account [[at least with the British "Rock" bands) is that most of them started off recording their own version of R&B and they were always keen to cite their inspiration as being various R&B and "Blues" acts. Even when they started drifting away from the R&B/Soul mainstream in 1967/8 a lot of them STILL thought they were producing authentic R&B, just given a modern twist. Indeed many people of a certain age [[50+) here in Britain think of the term R&B [[when describing records from the 1970s) as being primarily the music produced those acts, rather than applying to Motown/Philly/Funk etc.

Once the 1970s passed upcoming "Rock" bands were taking as their inspiration the likes of THE DOORS, THE ROLLING STONES, LED ZEPPELIN or THE WHO rather than the people that had originally inspired those acts.

In the early 80s, Rock, and almost everyone else, were trying to run away as far from anything Black as possible.

If you are talking in the U.S. then the answer is most probably yes .. however in Britain this was definitely NOT the case .. the emerging early '80s British "pop" acts such as SPANDAU BALLET, ABC and CULTURE CLUB, and to a lesser extent DEPECHE MODE and DURAN DURAN were part of a trend that rejected "Rock" and tried to reintroduce more of a "Soul" sound. This trend culminated in the mid '80s with acts like SIMPLY RED and LISA STANSFIELD who to all intents and purposes were recording "Soul"/"R&B". In the U.S. I'd say this trend was paralleled by acts like TOM TOM CLUB and MADONNA.

Roger

[soulster]

Good Lord. That makes me an "older cat". I'm aware that everything must change. But I can't help but miss the days when I could tell who was playing the bass on some records just by hearing the song. And forgive me for over-generalizing. Luther Vandross, Regina Belle, Anita Baker, Frankie Beverly, Jeffrey Osborne, and many others still carried the standard for years, but it seemed like they got lost in the changing times. I just miss R&B, I guess.

I hate that R&B in the 80s and 90s became synonymous with ballads.

[soulster]

My mind is wrapped around the loss of a vital P-Funk member, as well as a dear friend and big sister.

Sorry for your loss, Timmy. Who was that person?

[soulster]

[QUOTE=roger;109329]

I'd say the pivotal year was 1967 .. even as late as 1965/66 a lot of [[what were to become) "Rock" acts were recording music that was noticably "R&B" based, and featured very syncopated rhythms .. I'm thinking of tracks like "Gimme Some Loving" by SPENCER DAVIS or

"Paint It Black" by THE ROLLING STONES

here ..

Paint it Black???Dance floor? You're kidding, right?

One thing to take ointo account [[at least with the British "Rock" bands) is that most of them started off recording their own version of R&B and they were always keen to cite their inspiration as being various R&B and "Blues" acts. Even when they started drifting away from the R&B/Soul mainstream in 1967/8 a lot of them STILL thought they were producing authentic R&B, just given a modern twist.

Very true. Again, I think identification with the artist had a lot to do with the wild popularity of the music. And, here in the states, soul music became part of the civil rights movement. That put a lot of Whites off, and where many of them say the stopped listening to soul music. They never tell you why, though.

If you are talking in the U.S. then the answer is most probably yes .. however in Britain this was definitely NOT the case .. the emerging early '80s British "pop" acts such as SPANDAU BALLET, ABC and CULTURE CLUB, and to a lesser extent DEPECHE MODE and DURAN DURAN were part of a trend that rejected "Rock" and tried to reintroduce more of a "Soul" sound. This trend culminated in the mid '80s with acts like SIMPLY RED and LISA STANSFIELD who to all intents and purposes were recording "Soul"/"R&B". In the U.S. I'd say this trend was paralleled by acts like TOM TOM CLUB and MADONNA.

Roger

They were popular here to an extent, but here in the states, things always turned to the guitar-based rock. Sometimes, I think it's hard for non-U.S. citizens to understand just how much of a part race and racism plays into music here.

[juicefree20]

Soulster,

Just in case Timmy doesn't pass through, he was referring to Detroit's own Belita Woods, former lead singer of Brainstorm & most recently, a member of the P-Funk crew. She passed away yesterday. The thread is on the main forum.

[juicefree20]

Soulster,

I grew up hearing all sorts of music back in the 60s & 70s & as a kid, I enjoyed all kinds of music. In fact one of my childhood memories is of me & my friends [[2 brothers) Kenny & Anthony strutting down the street, ages 8, 7 & 6, with me carrying one of those big red transistor radios with "Kind Of A Drag" by The Buckinghams playing as loudly as we could pump one of those 1967 transistor radios. We used to go to the movies to watch Elvis Presley movies & we also strutted down the street the next year, being totally hyped while leaving the theatre after having seen "Wild In The Streets".

''14 or Fight", indeed.

Now we were James Brown, Wilson Pickett, Temotations, Four Tops, Stax, Aretha, Sam & Dave, Motown, Stax, Atlantic fanatics to the core. But with that said, if the music was good, then we didn't categorize it, we just liked it & listened to it. Whether it was Cream's "Sunshine Of Your Love", The Lovin' Spoonful's "Summer In The City", Buffalo Springfirld's "For What It's Worth", The Rascals "Groovin'" or "It's A Beautiful Morning", or even "Kind Of Hush" by Herman's Hermits, we really didn't get into the demographics of who made the music & for that, I'm grateful.

However, we did draw the line at Jimi Hendrix. We hated his music primarily because we simply couldn't dance to it. And to this day while I can appreciate his skills, I simply can't get into Jimi's music as I could The Classic IV & other Pop/Rock acts.

I have to say that I believe that that is definitely one of the biggest differences between the era that I grew up in & other eras. Even into the 70's, the people from my neighborhood showed love for groups such as Chicago, B.S & T & others. Still later, we were feeling Redbone & "Come & Get Your Love", loved AWB & the awesome "Pick Up The Pieces", "Cloudy", "A Love Of Your Own", amongst others & I remember how we marvelled at Stories when they dropped "Brother Louie" & David Bowie's "Fame", a groove so funky that even The Godfather gave it some love when he replicated it on "Hot [[I Need To Be Loved)". And right here in Brownsville, one of the most played songs in the neighborhood was Elton John's "Bennie & The Jets". I mean damn near everyone was playing that joint right alongside of James, Earth, Wind & Fire, The Commodores & Crown Heights Affair.

I believe that that tendency of Blacks being able to accept music on its own terms has been proven over & over again. Which is in stark contrast to our music, which usually had to move units, in order to be embraced & crossover to the maistream. Which is a tendency which has also been on display even when it comes to movies. We watch movies base upon the merit of the movie & don't tend to be turned off if the stars don't look like us.

We've paid to watch Bruce Lee, Bruce Willis & damn near everyone. If the movie was/is good, we don't tend to get turned off because we "can't relate" to the skin color or experience of the stars. We simply watch the movie for what it is.

Contrast that with the reaction to our movies or our stars. Lindsay Lohan can be in a movie & folks will go to see it. Put Cicely Tyson or any skilled actress in that same damn story with the same damn storyline & you know what will happen?

CRICKETS! The sound of crickets & just "us" buying tickets.

Now does that imply racism? I can't speak for the motivation of why some people do or rather DO NOT embrace our music or movies as easily as we do theirs. But this tendency which I believe can be borne out via a study of ticket sales & chart histories, certainly seems to indicate that we have far less of a problem being open to the offerings of others, than they have being open to ours.

Of course this doesn't apply to ALL people & obviously it wouldn't apply to music lovers who belong to a soul music forum. But outside of that, this has proven to be the case for many people. Seriously, when records that chart #1 on an R&B chart don't even scrape the Hot 100 chart, or charts somewhere in the 60s or 70s, then that says more than I need to say about it.

Which makes it rather ironic that it was the musical "bastard child" known as Rap/Hip-Hop, which re-opened the top rungs of the Pop charts to R&B since the mid-to-late 90s.

I believe that I like my youthful era better when more of us, both Black & Whit tended to listen to music with a much less prejudiced ear than other eras tended/tend to.

[juicefree20]

Roger,

Thank you for your view from across the pond.

I don't know why I didn't factor it in, but your point about how the "hippies" & "drugs" affected the music is an excellent point. Upon reflection, it doe appear as though that "Summer Of Love" is where the music seemed to take a deviation & I guess that it should be no surprise that that was also the year that The Doors blew up.

As you pointed out, that was the first time that I can remember that the guitar began taking prominence over vocals & melodies & even grooves in a lot of hits. I think back & remember seeing teenagers & young adults who sniffed Testors glue or Dope [[used for constructing gas-powered airplanes) in paper bags, who would then listen to spaced out music. They were so blitzed that they couldn't dance if they had wanted to. So they kinda rocked from side-toside, so rhythm wasn't exactly what they were grooving to.

Damn...I had forgotten about that part of those days. I was only 7 when this started, but I sure remember it as though it were yesterday.

Could it be that all of this had less to do with race than it did with people just getting totally blitzed & getting into the "hippie" & drug mindset, simply finding a new way to groove?

This thread has certainly given me a bit of food for thought.

[juicefree20]

ChiD

Thanks for your perspective!

And that's just what I was wondering before Roger made his post. I was wondering what happened to THE GROOVE?!?!

All of the British Invasion bands that I can remember were all heavily steeped in R&B or the Blues & they made music that could be danced to. And the music that they made was still relatable to the music & artists whom they emulated. I simply couldn't figure out how we ended up with Black Sabbath, Marilyn Mason & the like from those beginnings.

But while reading Roger's post & thought back to the era that he spoke about, I thought back to when I was a little guy, watching the so-called ''hippies'' & how they spoke & how they moved, or rather DIDN'T move when they were blasted. And back then, we kids were warned about those "crazy" folks & their drugs.

I began to think about the kind of music that they played back then & though I really didn't understand it at the age of 7, I now understand it today. I remember these guys & girls, completely wiped out standing around listening to The Jimi Hendrix Experience [[amongst others) & rocking to the guitar solos. They didn't really dance, they more or less swayed & being kids, we wondered what the hell was wrong with them.

We were kinds & we weren't trying to commune with nature, or find our innerselves through transcendental meditation. Hell, we just thought that they were crazy. We were dancers & to us, we had no use for music that we couldn't dance to. Unless it was a ballad, if it didn't have a groove, then it simply had no point.

When I think about it, there may be other factors involved, but looking back in hindsight, I think that it's safe to say that those experimental drugs had a large effect on how artists played & perceived music.

With that said, none of that meant that they had to lose the groove. After all, a very famous writer/musician out of Stax, I believe that it was Dan Penn who said, "Behind every great record was a pill."

And even if he meant & believed that, it sure didn't take away one ounce of soul out of the music that he was a part of making. So why the disconnect with the others who also indulged?

Perhaps that's more a function of "it ain't where you're from, it's where you're at".

And he wasn't in Haight-Ashbury, which from a musical perspective likely made all of the difference in the world.

[marv2]

Soulster,

Just in case Timmy doesn't pass through, he was referring to Detroit's own Belita Woods, former lead singer of Brainstorm & most recently, a member of the P-Funk crew. She passed away yesterday. The thread is on the main forum.

She truly was an Unsung hero. Her talents and career to us however was iconic!!!! Belita Woods ranked right there with the absolute best !

[soulster]

Soulster,

I grew up hearing all sorts of music back in the 60s & 70s & as a kid, I enjoyed all kinds of music. In fact one of my childhood memories is of me & my friends [[2 brothers) Kenny & Anthony strutting down the street, ages 8, 7 & 6, with me carrying one of those big red transistor radios with "Kind Of A Drag" by The Buckinghams playing as loudly as we could pump one of those 1967 transistor radios. We used to go to the movies to watch Elvis Presley movies & we also strutted down the street the next year, being totally hyped while leaving the theatre after having seen "Wild In The Streets".

''14 or Fight", indeed.

Now we were James Brown, Wilson Pickett, Temotations, Four Tops, Stax, Aretha, Sam & Dave, Motown, Stax, Atlantic fanatics to the core. But with that said, if the music was good, then we didn't categorize it, we just liked it & listened to it. Whether it was Cream's "Sunshine Of Your Love", The Lovin' Spoonful's "Summer In The City", Buffalo Springfirld's "For What It's Worth", The Rascals "Groovin'" or "It's A Beautiful Morning", or even "Kind Of Hush" by Herman's Hermits, we really didn't get into the demographics of who made the music & for that, I'm grateful.

However, we did draw the line at Jimi Hendrix. We hated his music primarily because we simply couldn't dance to it. And to this day while I can appreciate his skills, I simply can't get into Jimi's music as I could The Classic IV & other Pop/Rock acts.

That's just it, I don't dance, so dancing is never a factor in whether I like something or not. But, more often than not, I prefer there be a strong rhythm in the song, unless it's easy listening.

We listened to all of music and loved it. My family never bought rock/pop records unless they were The Supremes, The Essex, or Bobby Rydell, or someone along those lines. We heard the pop stuff on the radio, usually in the car. My mother loved that stuff just as much as jazz music, as she was a jazz singer in a big band when she was younger. I had my first transistor radio in 1967 at the age of four, and I was able to tune into any music I wanted. Where I lived, almost all that was on was pop/rock like The Doors, Tommy James & The Shondells, and, later Gary Puckett & The Union Gap, Tommy Roe, and everything else. But, we also heard The Beatles, Steppenwolf and the harder stuff too. Imagine about eight years ago when I discovered that my then-78-year-old mother, a Black woman liked Steppenwolf's "Born To Be Wild". Then I thought back to my childhood, and how she listened to all of that music then.

I have to say that I believe that that is definitely one of the biggest differences between the era that I grew up in & other eras. Even into the 70's, the people from my neighborhood showed love for groups such as Chicago, B.S & T & others. Still later, we were feeling Redbone & "Come & Get Your Love", loved AWB & the awesome "Pick Up The Pieces", "Cloudy", "A Love Of Your Own", amongst others & I remember how we marvelled at Stories when they dropped "Brother Louie" & David Bowie's "Fame", a groove so funky that even The Godfather gave it some love when he replicated it on "Hot [[I Need To Be Loved)". And right here in Brownsville, one of the most played songs in the neighborhood was Elton John's "Bennie & The Jets". I mean damn near everyone was playing that joint right alongside of James, Earth, Wind & Fire, The Commodores & Crown Heights Affair.

That's the way it was with us during the 70s, too. I grew up in a predominately White region of the country. In Jr. High, no one cared what kind of music it was, it was all enjoyed. White people dug Ohio Players, EWF, and KC & The Sunshine band, and especially disco, and Black black liked Boston, Peter Frampton, and others. My record and tape collection had examples of just about everything. Or, I heard it all on the radio, but wasn't able to buy all of the rock stuff until my college years in the 80s. It was then that I discovered bands like Yes, Kiss, Alice Cooper, and Led Zepplien beyond the hits. It was in high school when things changed. People suddenly became segregated with what they listened to. White guys dug Van Halen and Styx, and Black guys dug Brick and Bootsy's Rubber Band. The racism began to creep in. But, it still seemed that EWF, easy listening, and some disco was liked by everyone.

I believe that that tendency of Blacks being able to accept music on its own terms has been proven over & over again. Which is in stark contrast to our music, which usually had to move units, in order to be embraced & crossover to the maistream. Which is a tendency which has also been on display even when it comes to movies. We watch movies base upon the merit of the movie & don't tend to be turned off if the stars don't look like us.

We've paid to watch Bruce Lee, Bruce Willis & damn near everyone. If the movie was/is good, we don't tend to get turned off because we "can't relate" to the skin color or experience of the stars. We simply watch the movie for what it is.

Contrast that with the reaction to our movies or our stars. Lindsay Lohan can be in a movie & folks will go to see it. Put Cicely Tyson or any skilled actress in that same damn story with the same damn storyline & you know what will happen?

CRICKETS! The sound of crickets & just "us" buying tickets.

Now does that imply racism? I can't speak for the motivation of why some people do or rather DO NOT embrace our music or movies as easily as we do theirs. But this tendency which I believe can be borne out via a study of ticket sales & chart histories, certainly seems to indicate that we have far less of a problem being open to the offerings of others, than they have being open to ours.

I believe it is a form of bias or racism. More often than not, unless it's a Black mega-star doing an action-adventure film, Whites still tend to view a film with Black faces as a "Black" movie. Hollywood knows this and shies away from marketing such a film to all audiences. In some parts of the south, in 2012, audiences still won't watch a TV show or film with an interracial couple if it's a Black male and White female. The same thing goes for music. White guys who grew up in the largely segregated 'burbs tend not to like, or even know about any Black music. It's the music "those people" listen to, not White folk. Rap music did a lot to erode that mindset for the younger generations, but that mindset still holds true for a lot of baby-boomers.

Of course this doesn't apply to ALL people & obviously it wouldn't apply to music lovers who belong to a soul music forum. But outside of that, this has proven to be the case for many people. Seriously, when records that chart #1 on an R&B chart don't even scrape the Hot 100 chart, or charts somewhere in the 60s or 70s, then that says more than I need to say about it.

I'll bet our U.K. friends on this forum are doing the face-palm thing wondering what is wrong with America.

[Hotspurman]

“I'll bet our U.K. friends on this forum are doing the face-palm thing wondering what is wrong with America.”

I’ve been reading this thread all the way through and thinking that none of it tallies with my experiences in Britain. When I began going to clubs at the age of 14 [[yes, really – the door policy at some was really slack!), I was more worried about being identified as a someone from Mill End by someone from Croxley Green or South Oxhey than being a white kid listening to and enjoying black music!

As I got older and ventured further from home and into the London clubs, I could safely assume no one was interested in Mill End; it was all about the music. Now I will admit that I deliberately gravitated towards clubs that would play the kind of music I liked, which was soul/disco, but then so did everyone else in the clubs I went to – gay and straight, black and white, male and female. I’m sure that if the rock side of my personality had won over [[I spent my early teenage years also listening to rock such as Emerson Lake & Palmer, Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath and Deep Purple, because the guys I went around with liked those bands) I’d have ended up going to clubs that had rock music on the their playlists. And I know from later experience that the clientele of those clubs was predominantly white, male and straight. So maybe the soul crowd was rather more integrated and multi-cultural than any other musical style.

A few years later and my musical life became completely dominated by soul music, both professionally [[I was working for Pye records) and personally. Much of it never got played on the radio, so we tended to hang around clubs and events that catered for our tastes – the original Caister Soul Weekends, for example, are memories I will cherish forever and a day. Again, the attendees were mixed racially, geographically and sexually, but I don’t recall this ever being a problem. Many of us also went to the gay clubs too, such as the Embassy, because their musical policy was similar.

To get back to the original thread and Michael Jackson’s ‘Beat It’ – at the time the record came out I was working as Head of Press for CBS Records. Whenever a major album was about to be released, the CBS marketing department would host an internal listening party, with press, marketing and promotion staff from both CBS and Epic in attendance, and vice versa. So CBS hosted a party for the new Adam Ant or Bruce Springsteen album and Epic did the same for Abba and Michael Jackson. When the Thriller album was first played, the majority of those in attendance, including the MD, expressed their disappointment, since there didn’t appear to be anything as instantly catchy as ‘Rock With You’ or ‘Off The Wall’, no stunning dance track such as ‘Don’t Stop ‘Til You Get Enough’ and no tearjerker to match ‘She’s Out Of My Life’. I can honestly say with hand on heart that I was in the minority that actually liked the album – it was brave, significantly different and appeared to have a number of potential hit singles. I quite liked ‘Beat It’ when I first heard it – in the right place, a rock guitar in soul music works quite well [[have a listen to ‘That’s What’s Wrong With Me’ by Rose Royce on ‘Strikes Again’), but the track became even better when you saw the video. As to whether a black artist could have delivered a better solo, I’m not so sure; Eddie Van Halen was undoubtedly one of the best of his generation and gives ‘Beat It’ a certain punch that I think other guitarists [[white or black) would have struggled to match.

[Hotspurman]

"I don't know why I didn't factor it in, but your point about how the "hippies" & "drugs" affected the music is an excellent point. Upon reflection, it doe appear as though that "Summer Of Love" is where the music seemed to take a deviation & I guess that it should be no surprise that that was also the year that The Doors blew up."

I can't help thinking that they should have taken the advice of Michael Caine in The Italian Job - 'You're only supposed to blow the bloody Doors off' - rock music might have ended up completely different.

[soulster]

I’ve been reading this thread all the way through and thinking that none of it tallies with my experiences in Britain. When I began going to clubs at the age of 14 [[yes, really – the door policy at some was really slack!), I was more worried about being identified as a someone from Mill End by someone from Croxley Green or South Oxhey than being a white kid listening to and enjoying black music!

As I got older and ventured further from home and into the London clubs, I could safely assume no one was interested in Mill End; it was all about the music. Now I will admit that I deliberately gravitated towards clubs that would play the kind of music I liked, which was soul/disco, but then so did everyone else in the clubs I went to – gay and straight, black and white, male and female. I’m sure that if the rock side of my personality had won over [[I spent my early teenage years also listening to rock such as Emerson Lake & Palmer, Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath and Deep Purple, because the guys I went around with liked those bands) I’d have ended up going to clubs that had rock music on the their playlists. And I know from later experience that the clientele of those clubs was predominantly white, male and straight. So maybe the soul crowd was rather more integrated and multi-cultural than any other musical style.

A few years later and my musical life became completely dominated by soul music, both professionally [[I was working for Pye records) and personally. Much of it never got played on the radio, so we tended to hang around clubs and events that catered for our tastes – the original Caister Soul Weekends, for example, are memories I will cherish forever and a day. Again, the attendees were mixed racially, geographically and sexually, but I don’t recall this ever being a problem. Many of us also went to the gay clubs too, such as the Embassy, because their musical policy was similar.

To a large extent, the American experience in most of the U.S., it isn't about going to clubs as much, it's about buying the product and listening to the music at home. In other words, music is seen as a much more personalized experience. People here do not go to clubs specifically for the music. It's a social event where the music is just the backdrop. It's just there to set the tone. That's why we still have clubs for various types of music.

When the Thriller album was first played, the majority of those in attendance, including the MD, expressed their disappointment, since there didn’t appear to be anything as instantly catchy as ‘Rock With You’ or ‘Off The Wall’, no stunning dance track such as ‘Don’t Stop ‘Til You Get Enough’ and no tearjerker to match ‘She’s Out Of My Life’. I can honestly say with hand on heart that I was in the minority that actually liked the album –...

My opinion was similar to that of the majority in attendance.I was in my favorite record store one chilly night in early December, and I actually had no clue that the record was out. I was there looking for something else. I ran into my old jr. high band teacher who was also buying music, and he looked at me ans said "Are you looking for the Michael Jackson album? There it is!", and points to a fresh box the employee had just brought out. He also had a copy. In those days, if an album was a hot seller, they didn't bother to place it in the bin, they just opened up a couple of boxes and placed them on the sales floor. So, I forgot what I was looking for and picked up a copy too, as someone said that it was selling fast. I remember a similar frenzy when "Hotel California" was released by Eagles, people rushed in to buy it. I recall one woman who was so happy to get her hands on it! Anyway...I got the record home and immediately put it on, and was not impressed when "Wanna Be Starting Something" played. It was monotonous and seemed to never end. "Baby Be Mine" was a little better, but it was bland as milk. I'm one of the few people in the world who like "The Girl Is Mine" and thought it was the first bright spot on the album so far. It was already in the top of the charts, so there was no surprise there. I was, again, not impressed with the title track. I turned the record over and "beat It" surprised me and I thought that there was some saving grace to the record. I loved it! Then, the crown jewel of the album came on: "Billie Jean". It was already on top of the Soul charts, but until that point I had never heard it. I can see how Q, Bruce, and Michael would all be grinning and acting a fool while the mix played in the studio. After that, it was all a snooze. I actually took the record off in the middle od "The Lady In My Life". To this day, I can't even tell you how the song goes, other than that it's a boring ballad.

...it was brave, significantly different and appeared to have a number of potential hit singles. I quite liked ‘Beat It’ when I first heard it – in the right place, a rock guitar in soul music works quite well [[have a listen to ‘That’s What’s Wrong With Me’ by Rose Royce on ‘Strikes Again’), but the track became even better when you saw the video. As to whether a black artist could have delivered a better solo, I’m not so sure; Eddie Van Halen was undoubtedly one of the best of his generation and gives ‘Beat It’ a certain punch that I think other guitarists [[white or black) would have struggled to match.

It's not about the race of the guitarist. It's about the style of playing that EVH brought to the record. No one could have done it that way. No one! And, Eddie probably likes R&B music too. I'll bet money that if it hadn't been for David Lee Roth, VH would have had an R&B song on one of their albums.

[soulster]

"I don't know why I didn't factor it in, but your point about how the "hippies" & "drugs" affected the music is an excellent point. Upon reflection, it doe appear as though that "Summer Of Love" is where the music seemed to take a deviation & I guess that it should be no surprise that that was also the year that The Doors blew up."

Well, drugs had a major influence on American music since 1965, two years before "the summer of love". The Beatles were using, Bob Dylan was using, The Byrds were using, the Rolling Stones were using, Jimi Hendrix...all kinds of artists were using. In 1966, Brian Wilson came up with "Pet Sounds", which was drug influenced in that he was experimenting with drugs too. It seemed like a "rock" thing. The only group of people that it seemed weren't using were the soul artists. Well, maybe Marvin Gaye was.

[Hotspurman]

"To a large extent, the American experience in most of the U.S., it isn't about going to clubs as much, it's about buying the product and listening to the music at home. In other words, music is seen as a much more personalized experience. People here do not go to clubs specifically for the music. It's a social event where the music is just the backdrop. It's just there to set the tone. That's why we still have clubs for various types of music."

Singles are something you share with other people - the first record we had played at our wedding was 'Reunited' by Peaches & Herb, because I had met my wife when we were at school before linking up with her again some ten years later and then marrying. And I bet thousands of other people have recollections about 'Reunited', 'I Will Survive', 'Just My Imagination' and even the likes of 'Get The Funk Out Ma Face', 'One Nation Under A Groove' and 'Sex Machine' that mirror yours and mine. Albums, however, are a much more personal experience. How we acquire them, how and where we listen to them and what we experience is unique.

With regards to 'Beat It' and the guitar solo, I agree it's not about the race of the guitarist. I said that Eddie gave it a certain punch that no other guitarist could have.

[Hotspurman]

Since the guitar solo was made up on the spot by Eddie Van Halen, it would be interesting to hear what the record would have sounded like if someone else had got the call. I say this as I am in the middle of approving releases by Bert Weedon and Chet Atkins – imagine if they had been asked instead of Eddie! Or how about Steven ‘Cat’ Coore of Third World?

I had an idea once for a television talent contest where bands from different musical genres would all play the same song but put their own slant on it. Think of ‘Help Me Make It Through The Night’ and how different it sounds by Kris Kristofferson, Gladys Knight and John Holt. Or ‘Smooth Criminal’ by Michael Jackson and Alien Ant Farm. Or ‘Ma’ by The Temptations and Rare Earth. I wonder if Simon Cowell reads this forum?

[Jerry Oz]

Good point. I submit to you the various versions of "I Heard It Through the Grapevine". Marvin sang it differently than anyone else but you would swear that the song was written to be sung and arranged the way that he did it. And then Roger Troutman through out all pretense of doing it as a straight cover and just came out with a funk classic. Another of my favorites is what UB40 did to Neil Diamond's "Red Red Wine". If not a television show, I'd pay for albums with top artists of various genres doing the same song. That would be a great concept.

[soulster]

Good point. I submit to you the various versions of "I Heard It Through the Grapevine". Marvin sang it differently than anyone else but you would swear that the song was written to be sung and arranged the way that he did it.

It probably was, since he did the original recording. Not only that, if it had been released first, it would have been ahead of it's time. You gotta admit that Gaye's version sounded like it came out of the 70s, not 1967!

[Jerry Oz]

Who produced Marvin Gaye's version?

[soulster]

Who produced Marvin Gaye's version?

Norman Whitfield
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Heard..._the_Grapevine

[marv2]

I liked Gladys Knight and the Pips version. That is the one I heard first. A few years later when I heard Mavin Gaye's version, I liked it too. It sounded like a different song to me as a kid. Today, I still give Gladys & the Pips the edge.

In regards to "Beat It". I didn't think a lot of the song on record. The video is what made the song memorable to me. It was in the early stages of music videos having the greater influence that the record or radio play.

[tamla617]

bobby taylors version of "grapevine"was good too.the backing track is the same as gladys's,was that a whitfield job aswell?

[Jerry Oz]

My last memory of my grandfather was the fact that he absolutely loved "I Heard It Through the Grapevine" [[Marvin's version). He had it on 45 the last time he visited us in '72 or '73. For that alone, it holds a rare place in my heart and memory.

[gary_james]

I've always thought of it as Pop Fluff, kid's stuff. Ok for dancing and a video. Eddie's solo is good, but we knew he was.

[Jerry Oz]

"Thriller" was lightning in a bottle. It was the tipping point for crossover music and arrived at the perfect time. Michael Jackson was already well known to black and white audiences and MTV needed something to exploit in order to grow. They gained millions of new viewers by opening up their playlist. For awhile, it seemed like it was All Michael, All the Time, culminating with the long-form "Thriller" video, which was one of the seminal events in pop music, especially with regards to video. They'd also go on to debut "Bad" and other MJ songs with immense fanfare and prior notice. That's interesting since they didn't want him on their station to begin with.