Eddie Grant - yes, he had a few big hits in the UK charts with some reggae-lite. But where to draw the line? As I already pointed out, many of the works on here are on the pop side of reggae. But if they have a reggae beat, and are from the right era, then they should be listed in the name of completeness.
And remember, Ska was once 'popular' music... Would you exclude such a hit as 'Suzanne Beware of the Devil' from any discography charting the rise of serious Jamaican music?
And what about the Trojan compilations, some of the tracks on them are very poppy and reggae-lite.
UB40
-
picaraza
- Posts: 141
- Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 8:14 pm
Re: UB40
For me it is fairly strange to hear "pop" reggae condemned. The elitism is pretty amusing.
As for the term "reggae-lite". That is not very accurate either. "Pop" reggae, rock steady, early reggae is not lite roots music that has somehow fallen short of its true goal.
One of the beauties of "rock" music is that it is pretty indiscriminating when it comes it comes to its own boundaries. Everything from doo-wop to heavy metal, Can to the Flying Burrito Brothers, Sly and the Family Stone to the Beach Boys, Jerry Lee Lewis to the Beat, ELP to Run-DMC, Queen to the Ramones is called "rock". And none of this has anything (really) to do with the "real" thing-- Louis Jordan, Big Joe Turner, Wynonie Harris. [Rock and roll was pretty much over by the time Elvis Presley came around.]
Anyway...
[Sorry if the musical references in the above screed are a bit outdated-- but you see, I am old]
The boundaries of roots music are pretty well defined IMO. The boundaries of "reggae" are, in my opinion, not that clear-- nor should they be. For better or worse, the term "reggae" has become a catchall term that comprises ska, rock stead, reggae, roots, dancehall, dub, ragga, and on and on.
So why draw the line at UB40? Why not Eddy Grant? Or the Beat? Or the Fun Boy Three? [I know, dated references] The lines between Jamaican DJ music and hip hop can be fairly fluid. As can the lines between "reggae" and "rock".
And the *Rough Guide* recommends Thomas Mapfumo's Corruption album. This is a great, great album. But it is no more reggae than the out put any number of Two Tone groups.
Ok, cantankerous rant over.
As for the term "reggae-lite". That is not very accurate either. "Pop" reggae, rock steady, early reggae is not lite roots music that has somehow fallen short of its true goal.
One of the beauties of "rock" music is that it is pretty indiscriminating when it comes it comes to its own boundaries. Everything from doo-wop to heavy metal, Can to the Flying Burrito Brothers, Sly and the Family Stone to the Beach Boys, Jerry Lee Lewis to the Beat, ELP to Run-DMC, Queen to the Ramones is called "rock". And none of this has anything (really) to do with the "real" thing-- Louis Jordan, Big Joe Turner, Wynonie Harris. [Rock and roll was pretty much over by the time Elvis Presley came around.]
Anyway...
[Sorry if the musical references in the above screed are a bit outdated-- but you see, I am old]
The boundaries of roots music are pretty well defined IMO. The boundaries of "reggae" are, in my opinion, not that clear-- nor should they be. For better or worse, the term "reggae" has become a catchall term that comprises ska, rock stead, reggae, roots, dancehall, dub, ragga, and on and on.
So why draw the line at UB40? Why not Eddy Grant? Or the Beat? Or the Fun Boy Three? [I know, dated references] The lines between Jamaican DJ music and hip hop can be fairly fluid. As can the lines between "reggae" and "rock".
And the *Rough Guide* recommends Thomas Mapfumo's Corruption album. This is a great, great album. But it is no more reggae than the out put any number of Two Tone groups.
Ok, cantankerous rant over.
-
madc-ccc
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 10:06 am
Re: UB40
Is it fair to assume that the people who hate UB40 probably do not know their first three LP's "Signing Off" (incredible album!!!!), "Present Arms" and "UB44" - as well as their pretty great live album recorded in Russia at the same period?
If so, then I better understand their strong will to keep UB40 away from the RA database: it's true that UB40 became so crappy, starting from "Labour of Love" and then getting worse and worse years after years! What a pity and a shame...
However I personally *LOVE* their pre-1983 period, and I would be very happy to see them represented in the Roots Archives database.
Peace to all RA forumers,
MadC.
If so, then I better understand their strong will to keep UB40 away from the RA database: it's true that UB40 became so crappy, starting from "Labour of Love" and then getting worse and worse years after years! What a pity and a shame...
However I personally *LOVE* their pre-1983 period, and I would be very happy to see them represented in the Roots Archives database.
Peace to all RA forumers,
MadC.
-
leggo rocker
- Posts: 4071
- Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2005 4:40 pm
Re: UB40
I agree, UB40s first LPs are well worthy of inclusion. And they were, like it or not, a reggae band. Maybe they strayed pop-wise later in life, but they were born out of reggae.
Culture Club? They were New Romantics and not a reggae band. Did they ever even do a reggae song?
Same as we won't be including the Slits just because they did a reggaefied cover version of Heard it on the Grapevine (even if Dennis Bovell produced it!). Great tune though, must pick it up on 12 inch again sometime.
And Bullit is so right to add "what harm can it cause?"
So please, stop being so pedantic about what is and isn't reggae music. If your a roots lover and hate anything lighter then that's fine. But just because it is listed here it doesn't mean we think it is good or are telling you to buy it!
Culture Club? They were New Romantics and not a reggae band. Did they ever even do a reggae song?
Same as we won't be including the Slits just because they did a reggaefied cover version of Heard it on the Grapevine (even if Dennis Bovell produced it!). Great tune though, must pick it up on 12 inch again sometime.
And Bullit is so right to add "what harm can it cause?"
So please, stop being so pedantic about what is and isn't reggae music. If your a roots lover and hate anything lighter then that's fine. But just because it is listed here it doesn't mean we think it is good or are telling you to buy it!
-
Ross
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 5:21 am
Re: UB40
UB40s albums like "Signing Off (1980)", "Present Arms (1981)", Present Arms in Dub (1981)" and compilation called: "The UB40 File (1993)" should be definitely included on this site. these albums are maybe not the best examples of UK reggae but all of them are good enough to be listed on roots archives.
- selecta bing
- Posts: 861
- Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 7:04 am
Re: UB40
WHERE'S ASWAD ? (title of a 2BAD CARD track.)
Aswad is represented so I think UB40 could be too.
HOORAY ! for Aswad and UB40
UB40, The Wailers and MAXI PRIEST
touring AUST. & N.Z.
Feb 08........RAGAMUFFIN TOUR 08
Aswad is represented so I think UB40 could be too.
HOORAY ! for Aswad and UB40
UB40, The Wailers and MAXI PRIEST
touring AUST. & N.Z.
Feb 08........RAGAMUFFIN TOUR 08
Lick it back Selecta!
-
mat
- Site Admin
- Posts: 37
- Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 10:13 am
Re: UB40
Not true anymoreSurvival wrote:why isn't UB40 in the archive?
http://www.roots-archives.com/artist/4566