So this is what passes for punk these days?

Shameful

Way too pretty, way too polished.

You're more punk than me, man.

LOL Rich, did you see my post the other day about the history of punk?

Everything after '84 is only a loose shallow hall of mirrors reflection of the original, in my humble opinion

I believe I did read your piece, man.

I was really not a fan of early period punk. That sound was too harsh for me, overall. Raw is one thing, but rage without musicality just is not for me. NOFX's Punk in Drublic is widely considered to be the greatest punk album. Their sound is a little dated, but among the most widely imitated.

In general, my point of view is probably diametrically opposed to yours. In my never very humble opinion, the rock music of today is informed by that of earlier periods. Punk rock got better and more diverse. Grunge gave mainstream rock a transfusion after a decade and a half of glam and progressive rock. The '90s were a great period. Garbage, NOFX, Rancid, Dance Hall Crashers. Accessible, but still adhering to "subterranean values" of punk. Lately, I like Starky, Red Jumpsuit Apparatus, Damone, Fall Out Boy, Anberlin. There are some great bands out there.

All that music from 30 years ago... I got tired of listening to it 30 years ago. Give me the new stuff!

awwww

Sorry you're raging, dear. I'm too tired to rage. I just want sleep.

(Make a change....)

I've always heard people say that The Clash's London Calling is the best punk album. I gues it's all down to taste. I perfectly understand what you mean about the noise vs music factor, which, to draw a comparison would be Sex Pistols vs The Clash, or even more Brit punk vs American Punk. The Ramones at times are downright pop-y to me. Garbage wasn't Punk, they were the second wave of punk that transformed into New Wave/Alternative/College Rock, and had more in common with Blondie and REM than The Clash or Pistols. Rancid, while I love'em to death, are just the bastard child of The Clash...but in a good way. They MAY be the most punk band still out there. NOFX isn't punk at all, they are "hard core" or as I call'em "boozer" punk, more akin to Metallica than The Clash. Maybe my tastes are just too specific, but for me, Punk really boils down to The Pistols, The Clash, and The BuzzCocks

Let's get low! xox

Hey, Robin! Thanks for stopping by.

Hey, waking! Thanks for the subliminal messaging!

Man, to further elaborate (though not to argue):

Because I have a Web site where I review Christmas music I spend quite a bit of time classifying what I hear. Listeners need this sort of compartmentalization in order to find what they are looking for. It is difficult to classify music today, much more difficult than it might have been 40 years ago, when much of what is heard on the radio was easily identifiable as rock, blues, jazz, R&B, pop or classical. Nowadays, there are dozens of appelations that can be applied, even to rock: rockabilly, classic rock, rock and roll,, to start. There's (imagine the voice of Forrest Gump) folk rock, progressive rock, punk rock, goth, metal, grunge, post-grunge, and emo, just to name a few. For me punk rock is characterized primarily by the tempo and its driving beat, which often includes a lot of bass distortion and a telltale "ska" element. Add a sufficient amount of rage, and it becomes hard core. Add a little more bass, and it morphs into metal. Rarely do I find any music that falls neatly into one of the standard classes. It is common to find punk rock laced with an element of hip hop, for example. Trying to classify music today, which is informed by all of what has gone before, can be maddening. But it is partly the information about past music that gives music today its brilliance.

I need music to be accessible, too. The video included here--clearly punk, based on its tempo, time signature and rage--is easily accessible to old farts like myself. I need accessibility. I welcome it. I seldom look for the same things purists look for, in any genre. I look at "hard core" jazz as something the cat dragged in. It is sort of like modern art to me: something one can "appreciate" if one is educated about what to look for, but very difficult to love.

For me, NOFX epitomizes mature punk rock (an oxymoron, surely). Likewise, Red Jumpsuit Apparatus, Damone, and Jimmy Eat World. They allow me to cross the border into a youthful world and explore my rage safely, and somewhat at a distance. I can't as easily enjoy The Ramones or The Clash. They challenge me to understand and love punk at a much deeper level than I am prepared to go.

Very cool, Rich. I see I have started a healthy debate? :-)
I dig the bands you've mentioned in the comments here and I share your thoughts on "gimme the new stuff," (I think that's what keeps me young at heart) but Pstudman also has a point. I am grateful for the early punk movement, but glad the music has "progressed".
:-)

So, I wrote this really long comment early this morning, a comment that got lost in the Interwebs somewhere between here and Open Salon's crappy server. Which pretty much epitomizes the day I had.

Anyway, the comment was all about genre's of rock and why I like accessible punk rock, or some other nonsense that I can't even remember.

It's just as well.

Thanks to everyone who stopped by to comment:

Robin: happy to hear you're on the mend!

Spotted_mind: what a surprise and a pleasure to see you. You make some good points!

Placebostudman: I will take your words under advisement. I still say you're more punk than me, man.

Wakingupslowly: I'm painting myself into a corner, and may take your advice soon!

This is really hard music for meditation!!! (which is where I seem to be these days! ) Oh, God..... never could do punk! LOL