The Saints vs.Ramones (I'm Stranded/Now I Wanna Sniff Some Glue). 1974:Who came first?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 26 вер 2024
- The Ramones are universally considered as the first punk rock band in the history, since their debut in the 1974. However, in the first months of that year, totally unaware of what was happening in the chaotic NY, an Australian band with a strong guitarist (Ed Kuepper) was incredibly creating the same music - this rough session is the proof.
The first Ramones album came out some months before the first Saints' album - both came out in 1976. But two years before, it was really seeming that the Oz band (formed in 1973 as "Kid Galahad and the Eternals") started the history of punk before the American band. Who knows? Anyway, The Saints are a great, underrated, unlucky band, born too early in the wrong place.
"Rock music in the seventies was changed by three bands- the Sex Pistols, the Ramones and The Saints". (Bob Geldof)
"One thing I remember having had a really depressing effect on me was the first Ramones album. When I heard it [in 1976], I mean it was a great record ... but I hated it because I knew we'd been doing this sort of stuff for years. There was even a chord progression on that album that we used ... and I thought, "Fuck. We're going to be labeled as influenced by the Ramones", when nothing could have been further from the truth". (Ed Kuepper)
Just to be 100% accurate - this is Kid Galahad and the Eternals (who later became The Saints)
Ramones a 3 chord trick for 25 years. The Saints a better band.
Different styles, I think the Ramones were absolutely more radical than the Saints when they started, but I love em both. You can't beat the strange lyrics and vocal delivery of the Ramones. And there's no doubt which band was more imitated by other punk bands.
two words "The Saints"
The Saints were first. The Ramones were in New York so, more exposure.
I agree with your opinion. More exposure and better managements for sure.
Shame about the Saints songs though -not nearly as good. Boring lyrics and not even close with how tight the Ramones were. These guys are more like the Stooges but not nearly as good either. Sorry. Everyone is just here to say they've found something no else already has - like there was some magic band that gave the Ramones the formula. Just be grateful the Ramones even happened and STFU
Completely false!!!! I was born, raised and still live New York. I was a teenager during the 1970's CBGB's punk era. The Ramones and punk rock in general got 0 exposure during that era in New York and elsewhere in the USA. From what I can see The Saints got a 1000 times more exposure in Australia compared to what the Ramones received in the 70's and part of the 1980's.
The Saints were on Brisbane TV in 1976 ( ua-cam.com/video/Fv1oLKHz2F4/v-deo.html )and also had a music video ( ua-cam.com/video/MpMwMDqOprc/v-deo.html )possibly in the same year or in 1977. The Ramones didn't even have their music played on major radio stations within the USA until the mid to late 1980's. The only radio stations that would play the Ramones and other punk bands in the 70's and early 80's were small college radio stations.
The Ramones first music video was released in 1988 almost 10 years after the original recording of the song. So how again did the Ramones get more exposure? They were a New York band that could not get any exposure in the USA because they were a punk band.
The Saints were a great sounding band thats for sure but they changed music direction very quickly. The Ramones first album was much more heavier and raw power and they basically stayed with that style.
If you think growing up in New York was easy you should see what life was like in the early 80's. Watch Agnostic Front "The Godfathers of Hardcore" documentary it shows just how bad it was at that time.
Dictators in that mix
I heard someone say that "The saints realised they'd never get recognised for pioneering punk rock, so they became the pioneers of hardcore". Pretty accurate.
I'd never made any connection between hardcore and The Saints, not sure I hear it really
the Ramones...period.
the Saints got there first, wouldn't be surprised to find that only a few months after this recording they themselves started speeding the songs up. (i dont think speed is really a factor here anyway? considering slower punk songs do actually exist!)
i think the main reason people christen the Ramones with the 'first real punk band' label is because they had the advantage of being in New York, a place where it was far easier to garner an audience and to be heard than fucking Brisbane ESPECIALLY back in 1974. had the Saints had the opportunity to be as easily heard as the Ramones people would be just as quick to label them 'first punk band' as they are with the Ramones.
maybe it's just my Brisbane bias but for my money the title of first punk band goes to The Saints!! and for what it's worth Ramones are definitely one of the first true punk bands, i just don't reckon they're THE first! (love them too, just not as much as the Saints, i'm even wearing my Ramones shirt as i write this shit out!)
Ramones circa 75 was pretty slow in contrast to a year later (75 demos).
I love both bands.I think The Saints best.
Actually Ramones were formed in January 1974, not March!
And the saints were formed in 1973 not 74!
@@philliphamilton4782 No they didn't. they were 74 too. By that logic, the Ramones formed in 1965 as the Tangerine Puppets.
The Saints weren't even called the Saints at the point and didn't have a drummer in '73. They were called "Kid Galahad and the Eternals" in '73, even into early 1975. By that logic, The Sex Pistols formed before the Ramones as the Strand, in 1972. The Jam formed in 1973! So what?
I LOVE the Saints and consider them one of the earliest punk bands alongside the Ramones - but no, they weren't "before" the Ramones in terms of the punk sound... not anymore than the Stooges or MC5. I think the first two Saints albums are among the greatest rock records of the 70s. LOVE them.
So i'm not writing this to downplay the importance of the Saints. I had this CD or early recordings, which was early 74? Amazing stuff. But c'mon.... how can anyone in the right mind think this is the same as the Ramones? It's a bunch of cool kids doing Stooges stuff. which is GREAT mind you, but not the same as the Ramones.
The Saints predated all the UK stuff. But The Ramones were the first band to purposely strip music back to a specific concept that could be built on.
Duas bandas que fazem parte da minha adolescência. Acho que o título de pioneiro do punk cabe aos Ramones. O Saints no terceiro LP abandona o Punk. O guitarista fundador desaparece da cena. Os Ramones mantiveram o Punk por décadas. Não dá para comparar....
The Saints sounded more like the Stooges to me. Ramones were something special and very unique. Ramones were the first true punk band.
Plenty of the first Stooges album in The Saints for sure... all those "Come ons" and "Alrights" on Stranded are straight off No Fun. Makes the first Stooges album the first punk album in my book!
Punk was about the attitude and the saints had the fuck you attitude the stooges were just showman/gimmickie
Where did you get that recording of I'm Stranded from, and how do you know it was made in 1974?
Taken from "The Most Primitive Band In The World, (Live From The Twilight Zone, Brisbane 1974)"
Parallel evolution both reacting to Raw Power (Death did too)
You know what this reminds me of? There's this argument about what European was the first to "discover" the Americas, was it Columbus or Leif Eriksen? Well the Viking was clearly first, but... no one followed, so like, it sort of doesn't count, it's footnote stuff. Centuries later, here comes Columbus, then western colonialism followed, leading, for better or worse, to the USA, Canada, and Latin America. So, maybe the Saints pioneered a great sound a little before the Ramones, but if a tree falls in a forest with no witnesses, does it make a sound? The Saints didn't get their sounds down on wax until 5 or 6 months after the Ramones, and by that time, they were about to kinda get drowned out by the Pistols, Clash, Damned, Buzzcocks, et al. Hey ho, lets go, let the history books continue to record punk's most significant pioneers as the Ramones.
sort of wrong there dude..
@@arthurdent6828 Which part? :)
@@LetsGoMetsGo33 Well The Saints were clearly playing before The Ramones even existed. Also a tree has never fallen in a forest with no witness ever. I don't really care about who started punk, but I think it's extremely important that history should always record the facts as they happened, not in the most fanciful way. Therefore it should go on record that The Saints were before The Ramones. The most significant pioneers were the proto-punk bands anyway, whatever that means. Genre labeling is seriously for chumps. I mean why aren't the so called proto-punk bands simply called punk? What's the fucking difference? Five letters?
Arthur Dent the Saints had their earliest rehearsals maybe a couple of months before Ramones, but as this video shows, their original sound was more protopunk than punk. The difference is speed, brevity. By the time the I’m Stranded LP came out, they absolutely had a punk sound. Ramones were the first band, IMO, to have a fully formed punk rock sound.But i’m happy to agree to disagree.
The Ramones are the first Punk band, no question. The Saints sounded considerably different in their early years from most Rock groups but they could still pass for a loud Hard Rock group. They didn't have the speed and energy of the early Ramones tracks which defined the Punk sound.
And when it comes to musical quality, the NYC boys eat their Brisbane counterparts for breakfast. :-)
Nice story but needs more cowbell..
So that’s why nearly every early saints gig got shut down by the cops because they were playing their music to slow which makes them sound softer. Maybe the slower music also was a reason why fights and riots started happening after their shows. They definitely can’t be the reason as well for creating the genre Brisbane Punk Rock. Haven’t heard New York Punk Rock yet
False
Saints were first
The saints were formed a year before the ramones and were so punk every gig they played got raided by police and no one would rent them a space to play a gig so they used there house! Ain't nothing more punk than that!
Neither one were first
this version of i'm stranded is far too slow for punk rock and also it's much too long ( a 'punk' song that's over 4 minutes? wtf ?! ) . whereas now i wanna sniff some glue with its length of not even one and a half minutes already sounds pretty punkish.
Listen to "Beat On The Brat" by Ramones, it's about the same speed. And yes, punk rock was not only super-short songs, but also slightly longer ones (including later Ramones songs).
+cuoccimix hah, of course i know beat on the brat, what did you think?
Also i am aware that the ramones made longer tracks in their later career since i know almost every song from them. My point is just that this version of now i wanna sniff some glue is definitely more of what punk rock would eventually happen to sound like.
+Luis Kern it's like generation x's drummer said.
All bands in london were playing in an mc5 groove ( just like the saints here ) till the ramones came along and that all that super-fast stuff ( which was what most english punk bands played ) was totally down to the ramones.
Luis Kern: Well stated.
Ramones were 1000 times better than this - including the songs - and really, this just sounds like a band that really liked the Stooges.
Have you listened to the actual recording of I’m stranded? The song is fucking amazing and genius
@@SammyJCuthbert If this is still Ramones vs. the Saints I could count probably 35 songs the Ramones did that are way better. These guys are just a Stooges / MC5 sort of thing, and I do like it - not as much as the Ramones - a whole other sort of thing that changed everything.
Im with Sammy.