Post Punk vs. New Wave

Exactly. When they started playing NYC (late 1977 I think) there was nobody like them on the scene, which is why they had such a huge impact.

 

Yup; post punk is also ¨rockier¨than new wave, which is usually ¨poppier¨ to the uninitiated, but good point man !

 

Agreed though I love Fripp late 70'-80's......between king crimson and producing Daryl hall and the Roches he could do no wrong in my eyes!

 

Not to mention the Exposure album.

 

I also think "new wave" was an attempt by the major labels to "pretty up" punk in the US. A band like the Police or the Pretenders are looked at as new wave in the US, somewhat belying their respective punk roots, especially once MTV took hold.

 

Great album too....thanks for the reminder.i love the entirety of the King crimson discography.....though I only own the "on the road" big box and the first big 12' inch super deluxe of "itcotck" as well as the super deluxe of the recent "itcotck"!

 

Interesting geographical differences going on here. Pil were never considered to be a New Wave band in the UK. At the time we didn't really care or have a genre name for those sort of bands like Joy Division, Gang of Four etc. The likes of Duran Duran were labelled in with the poppier end of New Romantic like Spandau Ballet as well, definitely never called New Wave here. Bands like ABC were thought of as a pretty good pop ish band, whereas Kajagoo for instance were just considered a teenage girls pop band.

 

That's basically true. The term "New Wave" was popularized by Seymour Stein of Sire Records as a way to market new artists to people who were afraid of the term "punk".

At the same time, though, most of those bands (like the Pretenders and the Police) weren't full-blown punk anyway. More like "punk-adjacent." So it made sense to have a different term for them.

All this was very well-established by the beginning of the 80s, before MTV came along.

 

I occasionally see people try to sum post punk up with one adjective, and that's a tricky thing to do, since there were several strains of post punk, many of which were quite distinct from one another. I mean, in the broadest sense, post punk was essentially any band/artist who emerged after the initial wave of punk, but whose roots were in punk (whether they played it or were just inspired by it), yet not especially pop/top 40-oriented. But I suppose when differentiating post punk from new wave, you could at least say it tended to be artsier, edgier, and less commercially palatable.

New wave was a term used to market then-new pop bands who had a youthful, fresh, sharp, concise style and who were too poppy for punk, but still unique or forward-thinking enough to not fit comfortably in what had been considered mainstream up to that point. The Police, Elvis Costello, Blondie, Joe Jackson, B-52s, etc., fit into this category (whether they saw themselves as "new wave" or not).

I've also found that British people tend to bristle more at the term "new wave" than folks in the US, as I think the term was more wisely used and accepted in the US than in the UK.

 

They were never considered one here in the States either.

 

Just to add to this line of thinking, it seems to me that the Brits were much more particular/rigid about genres and sub-genres; e.g., whereas in the US we would lump The Police, Duran Duran, and ABC all under the banner of "new wave," the Brits would probably insist those bands were pop, new romantic, and "new pop," respectively.

Also, I think that what the Brits were simply calling "pop" at that time was so different from what Americans had perceived as "pop" up until that point, that simply calling The Police or ABC "pop" would have clashed with the way many Americans had perceived the term.

 

"Labelling" genres is silly.....I remember GANG OF FOUR Being labeled "AGIT-POP" at one point....

 

This is from the Village Voice August 1975. First big article about the CBGB scene. Unless I miss it, there is no attempt at naming it anything, punk or otherwise. Even if slightly off topic, it makes for an interesting read.

 

Post Punk was a retro-active sticker.

New Wave was a movement labeled as such by the music industry to get rid of Punk's subversion, while still packaging punk alike sounds.

New Wave bands were The Cars of The Knack or The Records.

Real original Punks all thought New Wave was a con and the New Wave bands were crap.

Many Punk bands jumped though on the New Wave bandwagon to make a quick buck.

 

Well... I'm actually from Berlin! I'm seeing that wall every day.

 

LOL . You got me there. Cheers mate!

 

+ The Motors, Tom Robinson Band, Gary Newman,...

 

I have to call an “audible” on the term “Post Punk”, anyone that ever said those words to me was too old or too young to be trusted.

 

Pretty strong influence on this Bauhaus track beginning at 3:34.

 

Ska/Reggae came right after New Wave and in fact wiped New Wave off.

I remember distinctly, there was Punk, then the industry tried to tame it with New Wave bands, then suddenly, you had this explosion with Madness, The Specials, Selecter etc. and that is what really transitioned Punk, as London Calling came out and mixed the original Punk with Rockabilly, and Ska/Reggae.

By the time One Step Beyond was out, along with the first Specials album (fall 1979), New Wave was completely gone and already dated. The fall of 79 was astonishing, and London Calling came out mid-december, we early Punkers were all living in that new punk world that was opening up all kind of musical venues to explore.

Add to this the dark bands like Bauhaus, Killing Joke, Gang Of Four etc. that were coming up, and this were real exciting times for music.

 

New Wave from former Yugoslavia. Top of the notch!

 

In case anyone is still following this thread, I've come to understand over the years that the main difference is in political aesthetics.
Post-punk kept the political (or mostly politically) lyrics, image, videos, etc., while rejecting the limited, anti-studio stance of punk. Also, post-punk leans more towards the serious, sometimes dystopian, often anti-establishment, with a darker image or rejection of hip fashion. Musically, post punk tends to be darker than both punk and new wave, but embraces studio techniques, orchestral music and complex arrangements.
New Wave, on the other hand, dumped the politics and bare bones musicianship, but incorporated the image (with some brighter touches) and quirkiness of punk. Musically, new wave tends to be more upbeat and poppy, but incorporates the avant garde and quirky electronic sounds. It was also more likely to be a club hit.
Like any music label, they bleed into each other (which has been well established in this thread). I would consider Elvis Costello, Public Image Limited, Bauhaus and the Pretenders post-punk, and Spandau Ballet, Duran Duran, Human League and Thompson Twins as New Wave.

 

I think that saying New Wave was "wiped off" by the late seventies is misleading. While some of the bands you listed were a rejection of New Wave, the rise of the genre came in the early to mid 80s, fizzling out by 1987 or so. To me, the last purely New Wave hit was the ridiculous, over-the -top "Living on Video."

 

Not in the UK. Bauhaus and P.i.L were Post-Punk; Elvis Costello and Pretenders were New Wave; Spandau, Duran, Human League (Dare era) and Thompson Twins were New Romantic.

 

so where do you put the fall ? new wave or post-punk ?