Grateful Dead

If you tried to give rock and roll another name, you might call it 'Chuck Berry'- John Lennon

"The blues started with field workers on farms who got it from gospel and African roots." Field workers on farms? That's got to be satire, because you've got to be kidding. The blues developed out of field chants -- yes, of African origins -- by slaves on plantations who were systemically murdered, lynched, starved and beaten by armed guards and who were bought and sold as sub-human property. And that went on from the 1600s well into the 1950s, perhaps later. Fixed it for ya.

Think I’d call the blues more like the Gleam in RR daddy’s eye, the weight in his preverbal sack if you will... than the birth...but unquestionably a major genetic element...

Started with the blues. The blues started with field workers on farms who got it from gospel and African roots.

Nope, 1962, buda da ba bop boom, heyyyyI do recall this thing called pong my cousins had? Probably turned me off of games for life; ) Hell, we didn’t get cable till the late 70s...color tv was out, but didn’t get that till early 70s... My mother RIP, still had rotary phones till the day she died (2016) LOL Computers? I suppose we learned about those from watching the Apollo missions with their real to real,looking behemoths that took up whole buildings....same processing power like in a phone now... When your living through it day to day you don’t necessarily get how much things have changed. Sorta like the quality of Dead recordings and how that has progressed. I don’t think there’s too many old timers out there, that started out desperately grabbing any shitty tape thay could because it wasn’t like they were growing on trees, that ever could have imagined the quality and access we have now..

The undisputed father/king? what ever of all that has followed, tech wise, was Les Paul. Fascinating man/story. Looping, multi-tracking, ping ponging, effects you name it. He most likely invented it.

Keithfan, though your essay was very good and spot on, I respectfully disagree with your overall premise.I think if we use the human life cycle for analogy, I’d say that the Beatles were not the birth, but more like late adolescence/early adulthood. The coming of age so to speak. They were learning who they were, about the world, and experimenting accordingly like only adolescent people do. Even the embracing of new technology usually is most prevalent amongst the younger generations (I’m generalizing here folks so spare us the one off examples....like just because George Burns lived to be 10?, doesn’t mean smokings not bad for you, science does not work that way) This is why most of the change and cultural shifts that occur, are usually driven by the exuberant, fresh, eager, teens to thirties folks, who are in the physical primes of their lives.....and the brain is of course a physical thing? So I propose, the real birth, the real father, the real King of RR is Mr Chuck Berry. (I know we can take this a step further, but here I would borrow KF’s embryonic example). Imho, Chuck was the guy who really built the platform that almost all other RR was built on, including the Beatles...Hell there are numerous references by the Beatles saying such....and Elvis...He was more like a little leaguer, while a Chuck was JV, and then the Beatles were Pro ballers.... Elvis did not write music, nor would many consider him a real musician. (Yes he could bang out some rhythms and hide behind the guitar like has been done by many “stars” including today’s Taylor Swift etc) He was basically a fine singer who aspired to, and was courted by Hollywood. No offense meant, his influence was immeasurable. But Chuck did it all, and he mostly did it himself, not through others like Elvis.. From the music, to being his own road manager, even driving himself to gigs, He even embraced new technology of the times too. I think Chuck is one of the most under the radar, yet influential persons of the 20th century..... Hey, if you don’t believe me, research what ALL the greats; Beatles, Dead, Stones you name it, they all acknowledge how much he influenced not only them personally, but RR overall. Which due to the cultural shifts and timing, influenced the whole world in a way many today cannot understand unless they were there. Just like we experienced what it was like when the Beatles did it.... So In other words, this is not really my theory at all. It is just me trying to pass along what I have read..... I’m just spitting out what all our hero’s have already stated.... As you have shone, there is no way to even begin to consider all at least popular music (saying all music might be a stretch...), that occurred during and after the Beatles, without acknowledging their influence. But I propose, that you cannt consider the Beatles, without considering how Chuck is in their DNA! Long live the King “Go Johnny Go! (Perhaps the perfect phrase to encompass all that youth, rebelliousness, RR are all about!) You go boy, indeed...

Beatles were the birth of Pop. Rock n roll had already been born. But honestly, I don’t really care where the ‘official’ start is because I pretty much just listen to Grateful Dead.

Somethings are hard to pinpoint, but for recording techniques,,, check enoch light's page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enoch_Light Pioneer in stereo recordings, hell appears to have invented the gatefold album. Also to early 50's rock recordings developed "cheap" effects, I thought I read once about Sun records recording stuff in bathrooms for echo/reverb effect. Maybe someone singing in a concrete hallway. I always think there is a book to be written about pop music and car stereos. I think recording techniques are older than readily available playback. I don't think you could have had pink Floyd in a 3 watt mono 6 inch speaker in your 58 chevy. I think as car playback systems got better the music got more dense(?). Same can be said for movies maybe. Growing up Perry Mason, F troop sound just fine out of a 8 in mono speaker. Can you imagine watching some marvel movie in 19" mono black and white. I don't think I'd say The Beatles were the birth of rock, if the beatles were all that than they stood on the shoulders of giants. The line of music goes back. Hard to pick a start. I think our age determines our view. The first time you said "the music today....." or "the kids today....", your old!

The birth of Rock and Roll is a matter of perspective to some extent, I agree, but I maintain that the birth of rock, as we know it today, started with the Beatles, and so we witnessed it. Everything prior to that was embryonic (though no less important). R&B, Rocket 88, Rock Around the Clock, Elvis - all cornerstones of the bigger picture, without question, but when I say we witnessed the birth of Rock and Roll, I mean we witnessed the Beatles and all that came after. The Beatles' sound was a truly unique amalgamation of all of those elements you mentioned. None of those elements were singly responsible for contemporary Rock music, but the Beatles were. Further,it was more than The Beatles' sound that was responsible for their unique place in the Rock and Roll annals; it was their integration of new recording technology as well (by that I mean more and more channels to the multi-track, as well as wholly new instruments like the mellotron, as well as tape editing, arrangement, overdubs, etc). The artist push the technology and the technology pushed the artist; this was a symbiotic occurrence that found its way into many early era Rock production ensembles (look at how Pete Townshend introduced minimalist composition technique with organs fed into synthesizers to bring not only new sounds to the rock palette, but to actually create a new mode of rhythm for the genre (i.e. Baba O'Riley & Won't Get Fooled Again). I also mentioned the cultural aspect of rock and roll development. These were children who grew up in the aftermath of World War II. They went on to compose music that was heavily influenced buy current events like the Vietnam War and the Civil Rights Movement. They reflected these issues back to their audience with social commentary, and messages of hope or despair (Sympathy for the Devil, All You Need Is Love). And the liberation of the younger generation from what they felt was a very oppressive older generation. Free love, free sex, individual Independence for young people - this still resonates today. So, yes, I understand your point and I agree that those influences where it important, but in the larger picture it was all in utero development, with Elvis perhaps being the last trimester. And then the Beatles came and changed everything, not just music. We did not Witness the conception of rock and roll, just the birth. And this I maintain can never happen again, because it's already been done. The technology, the social climate, heck, all the guitar riffs. Peace.