CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › Culture & Entertainment › Music › British vs. American punk?

British vs. American punk?

Started by Casey Green4 · · 👁 6 views · 92 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants Casey Green4Gary Hall60fadeddrifter26crimsonjackal8stormyviper11Kevin Chavez3Nicholas Perez33Sophia Nelson92analogharbor442Jason Chavez32James Morris7ironcrane7Alex Scott22Gregory Walker15Jason Diaz34rustyangler68Brian Foster2Carol Jackson45redcrane28ruggedcrane22redhound9Peter Hall6David Sullivan4feralgardener59 …
Casey Green4 Casey Green4 MemberOP
41 messages
joined Jul 2005
#1 ·
Pop music historians love to claim—and they’ve certainly left enough relics behind to prove it—that Americans were actually the ones who paved the way chronologically.
That said, those who swear by that classic British sound tend to argue that the whole thing really kicked off during the summer of 1975 over in the United Kingdom...

So, I'm curious, do you find yourself leaning more toward the American side of things or the British flavor of punk?

When we talk about proto-punk, we’re really looking at a handful of trailblazing, hard-to-label bands that started popping up in the late '60s, right up until punk truly exploded as a global phenomenon around 1975-76. Of course, nobody back then would have called themselves "proto-punk"; it wasn't a unified movement, and there wasn't one specific sound that linked everyone together at the time. What really binds them is a shared, provocative spirit that just didn't mesh with the dominant counterculture. These bands weren't just pushing back against standard rock tropes; they were actively rejecting the wide-eyed optimism of the hippie era. They were intentionally subversive and leaned into being outsiders—sometimes because they had high-concept, artistic goals, and other times just for the sheer fun of being rebellious. In terms of its lasting influence, a lot of proto-punk was intentionally raw and stripped back, even when it wasn't playing aggressively, and the production usually felt just as unrefined. There was also this tendency to dive into taboo topics, painting vivid pictures of the gritty underside of society and expressing a level of personal alienation that felt deeper than anything seen before. For several reasons, the Velvet Underground stands as the very first proto-punk group: they shattered boundaries with their lyrics, played with feedback, distortion, and white noise, and balanced an unpredictable, experimental edge with a focus on songwriting, all while maintaining a somewhat amateurish, raw energy. Emerging around 1969 , The raucous , almost amelodic rock of The MC5 and The Stooges did more to set The sonic blueprint for punk Than Any other bands. In the early '70s, the New York Dolls kickstarted what would become the New York City punk scene with their raw, Stonesy rock and glammed-up image; around the same time, you had these smaller recordings featuring the soon-to-be-iconic poets Patti Smith, Richard Hell, and Television's Tom Verlaine. most of The British artists Who could be considered proto-punk were also part of The glam rock scena , which inspired many futur punks with its simple , crunchy guitar Riffs , its outrageous sense of style, and the fact that the artists sang with British accents (not to mention the unique personas of David Bowie and Roxy Music).
Gary Hall60 Gary Hall60 Member
16 messages
joined Jun 2005
#2 ·
It's honestly tough to say... it really depends on the band rather than where they come from.🙂
fadeddrifter26 fadeddrifter26 Member
25 messages
joined Apr 2004
#3 ·
I don't listen to punk
crimsonjackal8 crimsonjackal8 Member
41 messages
joined Feb 2003
#4 ·
It’s basically impossible to answer this one. Personally, I’ve always been more drawn to that whole seventies American scene than anything coming out of the UK—though, honestly, The Clash are in a league of their own. So, how am I even supposed to vote now? 🙂
stormyviper11 stormyviper11 Active Member
81 messages
joined Nov 2007
#5 ·
Same story here. I dig both sides of the coin, but then there are certain guys from one group and certain ones from the other that just don't do it for me... I honestly can't make up my mind.
Kevin Chavez3 Kevin Chavez3 Veteran
2.4K messages
joined Dec 2002
#6 ·
Casey Green4 said:Pop music "historians" claim—and they’ve got the monuments to prove it—that Americans were chronologically first.

There’s really no point in arguing this—the first legitimate punk band was the Ramones, emerging in '74 in New York City, so Americans definitely hold the title.

Tufir said everything worth saying on the subject, so I won't waste any more of my time... 🙂
Nicholas Perez33 Nicholas Perez33 Veteran
1.4K messages
joined Jun 2005
#7 ·
I went with the Americans, though if we were talking about post-punk, I guess the British would have taken the point.
Sophia Nelson92 Sophia Nelson92 Newcomer
1 message
joined Jun 2005
#8 ·
The Ramones were more about the look than actually playing punk. They were all about the vibe, nothing more.

The Clash is pure punk. So if we're talking music, the Brits came first. But if we're talking about the scene, then it's the Americans.

Definitely the Brits.

👍 🙏
analogharbor442 analogharbor442 Member
13 messages
joined Nov 2006
#9 ·
The Stooges - Raw Power ('73)
Jason Chavez32 Jason Chavez32 Active Member
56 messages
joined Dec 2007
#10 ·
I have to admit, I’ve never really been one to dive headfirst into those punk spikes and all that, but there’s just something about that New York Dolls accent—it gives everything such a unique flavor.

And everyone seems to argue that punk basically exploded on both sides of the Atlantic at once, with the Ramones and the Sex Pistols leading the charge.

I don't know, god save the queen.
Gary Hall60 Gary Hall60 Member
16 messages
joined Jun 2005
#11 ·
analogharbor442 said:The Stooges - Raw Power ('73)

I feel like this leans more towards hardcore than punk, though it's still a fantastic album regardless! 🙂
James Morris7 James Morris7 Newcomer
3 messages
joined Apr 2005
#12 ·
I don't know, man. I love the Ramones, I love The Stooges... actually, I dig them even more than The Clash, and especially more than the Sex Pistols. But I've got huge respect for Magazine. I'm more into the American stuff too (including the Misfits 😍, Black Flag, and X—which I really need to dig into more...).

But what Laura Long5 said about post-punk... that's a whole different story.

Voting for the Americans. 🙂
ironcrane7 ironcrane7 Member
38 messages
joined Apr 2004
#13 ·
Kevin Chavez3 said:There’s really no point in arguing—the first legitimate punk band was the Ramones. They formed back in '74 in New York City, so Americans definitely beat everyone else to the punch.

Tufir said everything worth saying on this topic, so I’m not going to waste any more of my breath. 🙂

There will always be someone out there insisting The Sonics were the first punk band. Personally, I think the title belongs to Chuck Berry.

But then again, that’s all just looking backward. American punk never actually existed as a self-aware movement; it was more like an elitist little circle of friends and relatives, and even that only lasted for a brief window when the scene was still geographically concentrated. Besides, if you look at the aesthetic concepts, half the bands people usually cite don't even fit the mold. Television? That isn't punk. Virginia Plain was punk, and they were doing it three years earlier.

The Damned were the first real punk band.

I didn't vote.
Alex Scott22 Alex Scott22 Regular
313 messages
joined Jun 2005
#14 ·
ironcrane7 said:There’s always going to be someone claiming The Sonics were the first punk band.

Yeah.
stormyviper11 stormyviper11 Active Member
81 messages
joined Nov 2007
#15 ·
Still, I’m leaning towards the idea that Hasil Adkins was actually the first one...
Gregory Walker15 Gregory Walker15 Member
36 messages
joined Jun 2007
#16 ·
They both have their merits... though I find myself listening to American music just a bit more often...
Jason Diaz34 Jason Diaz34 Newcomer
7 messages
joined Aug 2005
#17 ·
The Velvet Underground were the pioneers, if you ask me.

An American 😁 Tufir put it quite elegantly (though opinions remain split on the sentimental side...), followed by Narantxa, but personally, I lean toward the Americans when it comes to the post-punk era. That's that.
rustyangler68 rustyangler68 Member
15 messages
joined Dec 2004
#18 ·
crimsonjackal8 said:There’s no way to answer a question like this. But The Clash sit above everyone else.

I'm with you on that one.

But as for the American...
crimsonjackal8 crimsonjackal8 Member
41 messages
joined Feb 2003
#19 ·
What now? I wrote "American" and someone felt the need to correct me? 😵 😁

And as for today's version of American "punk," maybe it’s fitting to pull a quote from Rancid out of context:

Let California fall into The fucking ocean 😁
Brian Foster2 Brian Foster2 Active Member
78 messages
joined Mar 2007
#20 ·
I actually cast my vote for that American band just because of the Ramones!

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads