1967 - Best year for debut albums ever?
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Top 10s and lists
Forum Description: List all your favourites here
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=49683
Printed Date: February 23 2025 at 02:30
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: 1967 - Best year for debut albums ever?
Posted By: Starless
Subject: 1967 - Best year for debut albums ever?
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 08:18
|
Beat this for essential debuts:
The Doors - The Doors
Piper At The Gates Of Dawn - Pink Floyd
Are You Experienced? - Jimi Hendrix Experience
Velvet Underground & Nico - Velvet Underground
Mr Fantasy - Traffic
Yes I know only one is "prog", but we're talking ground breaking essential music here, regardless of labels.
Bubbling under, but not essential:
London Conversation - John Martyn
Vanilla Fudge - Vanilla Fudge
Big Brother & The Holding Co. - Big Brother & The Holding Co
|
Replies:
Posted By: febus
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 10:21
|
Like it or not, you can't dismiss 2 albums that were instrumental to the birth of prog:
Days of future passed-Moody Blues
Procol Harum 1st album-PH
|
Posted By: Philip
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 10:41
|
Yeah, I agree. Some bands released their best works, or started careers with great albuns in this year. I think I would have liked to have lived in 1967. In terms of debut albums, regarding their quality, cultural impact, influence in otehr styles of music, this year, the year of psychadelism is the better of all time.
|
Posted By: BroSpence
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 10:41
|
Don't forget...
Captain Beefheart - Safe as Milk the Grateful Dead - s/t Moby Grape - s/t Procol Harum - s/t The Nice - The Emerlist DavJak Pearls Before Swine - One Nation Underground Savoy Brown - Shake Down The Red Krayola - The Parable of Arable Land Nico - Chelsea Girl David Bowie - David Bowie (although not his best, this was the start). Interestingly enough, ten years later there was another revolution of great debuts. |
Posted By: Starless
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 11:56
All good albums admittedly, but ground breaking? Mebbe Red Krayola & PBS as I'm ashamed to say I have never heard either!
|
BroSpence wrote:Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 11:57
|
And Elmer Gantry's Velvet Opera - s/t Parson Sound - s/t (okay, the only album by Parson Sound but a terrific album) H.P. Lovecraft -s/t The Incredible String Band - The 5000 Spirits or the Layers of the Onion Niemen Czeslaw - Dziwny Jest... Leonard Cohen - Songs of Leonard Cohen |
Posted By: Starless
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 12:03
Wasn't DoFP their 2nd LP? Deffo essential to prog tho'
 |
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 12:55
|
'67 and '73 were the years I would pick if I could only have (2) desert-island "years" to choose from... ------------- ...that moment you realize you like "Mob Rules" better than "Heaven and Hell" |
Posted By: BaldFriede
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 13:14
|
I would pick 1969 or 1970. So many bands debuted in these years. Not all of these debut albums were great ("From Genesis to Revelation" anyone?), but some were. To name but a few: 1969 High Tide - Sea Shanties Gentle Giant - Same Amon Düül 2 - Phallus Dei 1970 Guru Guru - UFO Focus - In and Out of Focus Atomic Rooster - Same -------------  BaldJean and I; I am the one in blue. |
Posted By: febus
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 14:18
No, no, ''Days of future passed'' was their really first issued in 1967!!
 If you exclude an album released earlier with Denny Laine on guitar that has nothing to do musically with the Moody Blues we know.
DOFP is regularly referenced as their first ''true'' release. ''In Search of The Lost Chord '' would be their 2nd LP
|
Posted By: Starless
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 14:30
|
[/QUOTE]
No, no, ''Days of future passed'' was their really first issued in 1967!!
If you exclude an album released earlier with Denny Laine on guitar that has nothing to do musically with the Moody Blues we know.
DOFP is regularly referenced as their first ''true'' release. ''In Search of The Lost Chord '' would be their 2nd LP [/QUOTE]
That's like saying From Genesis To Revelation wasn't the first Genesis LP because it bears no relation line-up wise or musically to what followed! It's still their first album tho', just as Magnificent Moodies is the first Moody Blues album, as indeed this very website will tell you.
Anyway, this ain't meant to be an argument, just a friendly "list" discussion
 |
Posted By: Starless
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 14:39
|
Just thought of one I missed:
Electric Music for The Mind & Body - Country Joe & The Fish
|
Posted By: Pnoom!
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 15:03
|
I doubt this is the best year, but I'd have to think for a better one. Certainly Safe as Milk and VU & Nico make this a pretty good competitor. |
Posted By: WalterDigsTunes
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 15:43
|
Great call, Starless. An unbeatable year, as far as I'm concerned. What would life be like without "Are You Experienced?" or "The Velvet Underground and Nico"? |
Posted By: Pnoom!
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 15:56
Better than life without post-1989 music  |
Posted By: WalterDigsTunes
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 16:08
|
There's no such thing. Only aimless twiddle-twaddle made by nobodies. Now, the real issue is... do fans prefer the UK or the US version of "Are You Experienced?" |
Posted By: Pnoom!
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 16:49
| Sometimes I like to think you don't really mean the nonsense you spout about post-1989 music because I don't like having nightmares about such appalling music taste. |
Posted By: 1800iareyay
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 16:56
The US. I don't normally go for cutting out tunes in favor of singles that are readily available on any greatest hits set (I VASTLY prefer the UK versions of The Clash and The Stones' Aftermath). But didn't the remasters put all the tracks that weren't available on each version? So the US got the cut tracks and the UK got the hit singles for convenience? |
Posted By: WalterDigsTunes
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 17:08
It's not nonsense, boyo. It's the Truth. There shall be no post-89 buffoonery in my presence. Real music, not new music. That's where the magic is. I pity the poor, misguided souls who would reject quality tunes in favour of diluted modern guff. I have nightmares about people with such appalling music taste. But now, back to 1967... a fantastic year for debuts. |
Posted By: WalterDigsTunes
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 17:08
Actually, the UK version came out first. 'Twas the US version that received the hit singles. But yeah, the remasters do have all the tunes, and then some. |
Posted By: 1800iareyay
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 17:14
Isn't that what I said? I said AYE? is the only time I prefer the hatchet job version to the actual debut. |
Posted By: WalterDigsTunes
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 17:16
|
So the US got the cut tracks and the UK got the hit singles for convenience? This last sentence threw me off. You're referring to the remastered edition here, I see. Now it makes sense. |
Posted By: Starless
Date Posted: June 25 2008 at 06:59
|
There seems to be an old debate rearing its ugly mush about pre & post 1989 (why 1989?) music twixt Pnoom and Walter. I have to say i'm with Walter on this one. By '89 almost everything had already been done, and anything new, particularly in prog, was nearly all a rehash of old ideas. There must be some exceptions, but I can't think of any offhand. If all post '89 music disappeared tomorrow, I would probably lose a third of my collection, but 75% of the real classics would still be there!
I thought I'd do a little research. Here in the UK respected broadsheet The Guardian published a list of, as they called it, "50 albums that changed the world"
http://arts.guardian.co.uk/features/story/0,,1821231,00.html - http://arts.guardian.co.uk/features/story/0,,1821231,00.html
Now, I don't know how the list was arrived at and I don't agree with all the choices, and there are some glaring omissions, and of course it has a UK bias. However of the 50 listed, only 11 are 1989 or later.
QED!
|
Posted By: 1800iareyay
Date Posted: June 25 2008 at 10:09
But of course only a few would be from the last 17 years (at the time of that poll). Frankly I'm surprised that 11 made it on. Music stopped being really innovative around the late 60s/early 70s because everything was explored. Now, that doesn't mean that newer bands don't sound fresh (the punk explosion, hip-hop, grunge, thrash metal), but an album that changes the world must be culture shifting in some way, which is less likely to happen when the Velvet Underground took rock to its furthest reaches (as well as SOME prog, but let's face it: the vast majority found a sound and stuck with it until they went pop). |
Posted By: BroSpence
Date Posted: June 25 2008 at 14:59
That Cohen came out in '68, and the ISB album is not their debut. |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: June 27 2008 at 00:25
"Twas silly of me to forget ISB's eponymous debut, but are you sure about Cohen's album? I've read that it was originally released by Columbia around Christmas of '67. |
Posted By: BroSpence
Date Posted: June 27 2008 at 18:47
Well apparently it was released then. I had seen it listed as being released in '67 on Wikipedia and '68 on AMG. So naturally I decided wikipedia was pulling tricks. His official website does have it listed as being released December '67. So I believe it now. Whoops! |
Posted By: jammun
Date Posted: June 27 2008 at 18:57
|
How about:
Sgt. Peppers
Disraeli Gears
Forever Changes
and there had to be a Who album released that year (A Quick One or Who Sell Out?)
Probably was a decent year for Zappa as well.
But realistically we could pick pretty much any year from '66 to '73 or so and they are all chock-full of great, timeless releases.
|
Posted By: jammun
Date Posted: June 27 2008 at 18:59
| ^^ sorry, missed that key 'debut' word, doh! |
Posted By: crimson87
Date Posted: July 13 2008 at 00:35
I mean , why did they put in The Dark side... "Without this: much less prog rock (if only...)"
The list lack of credibility showed out when they put on The Ramones debut , "without this: NO FUN".Thats hilarious!!!!
I have plenty of fun with pre 1976 releases.
|