Tom Petty has every right to air his opinions, of course. I happen to enjoy both artists, and I don´t find it important what Tom Petty might think of anybody´s music. Tom Petty did nothing wrong, and gave us some great music. As far as I know, Huey Lewis did nothing wrong, either, and gave us some memorable songs along the way. Storm in a teacup, and another excuse for people to lambast artists they don´t like. I like both.
Look up the Dave Edmunds' (aka Rockpile featuring Nick Lowe on bass) version of Bad is Bad. It was the b side of Girls Talk a good few years before Huey Lewis and The News recorded it. Lewis was part of the Stiff "scene" in London at the time, and his band Clover were the backing hand on the first Elvis Costello album, before Elvis formed the Attractions. Lewis didn't get signed and eventualy went back to the States Its quite odd how he transformed so completely into the stereotypical American pop-rock star a few years later. I really liked his Sports heyday. Plenty of room for that brand of music in my playlist.
As usual, Petty called it as he saw it. I don't think he is saying anything more than Huey Lewis's music is of no use to him. He likes vocalists he can believe in, and he does not find anything authentic in HL's voice. So he doesn't want to waste any time listening to it. And the music is "production line", which I would say is pretty hard to deny. Those who are comparing Petty's vocal "ability" to HL's are missing the point by several miles.
Same here. I look back and think Huey Lewis had a more interesting sound, aside from Damn the Torpedoes. Maybe HL lyrics were cheesy or whatnot, but I think Tom Petty's output was bland and really music for the masses, who aren't seekers of interesting and unique music. Tom has a point, and that's why I never listen to his music. I find it infinitely boring.
I think the mystery is more why Huey Lewis and his band ever got popular at all. I guess the answer is that they fitted a formula of what a rock band was supposed to sound like to get mainstream acceptance. Had they been a band from the 2000s, I think there would be speculation that the band was created by an algorithm. Most insipid pointless band ever. "Production line" nails it perfectly. This is not just about me not liking HL. There are many singers who I can't stand listening to. Bob Dylan is one. Yet I can understand why he has a dedicated following, and I could never accuse Bob of lacking artistic integrity or being formulaic. Now if someone says they didn't like Tom Petty's music, I could understand how that might be the case, but one thing you could never accuse him of was being insipid. Yes it's just my opinion, but that's what I think.
I'm not one to defend Huey, but a guy who sings through his nose with a half octave vocal range has no place critiquing anyone else.
I'm reading words like "fun", "popular" and "feel-good" about Huey. I'll take 'em. Got plenty of TP and HL in my collection. Like them both. Couldn't give a s*** what they thought of each other.
They both played 4 chord, bar band rock. Other than Tom’s lyrical advantage, they weren’t that different. But it’s par for the course for insecure musicians to bag on others. I bet Tom’s perspective would have changed later in life when actual bands disappeared from the mainstream, for the most part.
It may seem that way, in retrospect, but can you name any other band that sounded like them? Their combination of bluesy lead vocals with doo wop backups was pretty unusual in the synth 80s era.
Nice try but someone who has bothered to do the research traces Petty from a D2 to a D or C5. Tom Petty | The Range Planet
I love Tom, but not being a "sincere" songwriter/singer can sometimes work in your favour. Like...you might avoid writing 75 songs about loose women betraying you and having to pay for it one day.
I love Tom Petty. Own a lot of his music, saw him twice, etc. But c'mon... Everything he said about Huey Lewis could equally apply to Petty. There's absolutely nothing edgy about Tom's music. He's pretty middle-of-the-road. A little bit of Dylan, and a little bit of the Byrds. His music doesn't push the envelope at all. There's nothing remotely progressive or unique about his albums. Just lots of well-crafted pop rock tunes which are firmly in the tradition if you know what I mean. That doesn't mean his work has no merit, just that he brings nothing new to the table. He shouldn't be putting Lewis down for being generic in other words.
I hear ya, totally. Then again, there’s a LOT of music that got real popular (in its time), that also didn’t stand the test of time one bit. Huey+News seem to fit the bill in that regard, not unlike Smashmouth and Nickelback, in their day. Yes, Huey had more hits than Smashmouth, but the significance of the music (over time) seems pretty similar. BTW, I’m not suggesting threads like this should proliferate the Steve Hoffman Forums. But clearly Petty was asked his opinion of Monsieur Lewis, and if it is a point of discussion, I’m not going to pretend like I think Petty’s take was off-base. If anyone wants to argue how much fun Huey Lewis was, or how “feel-good” his music is, or how good he was at churning out music that hit that particular sweet spot — and in such a way that actually garnered some chart success — you’ll get no argument from me. He was pretty darn successful in all those regards. But to suggest there was more “there” there is absurd, which I think was simply Petty’s point, which I’m simply in agreement with.
Agreed, a bit of pot calling the kettle black. They both found ways of making straight ahead rock’n’roll palatable to the masses in the 80s, no small feat.
From a lyrical perspective that’s true, but you could make a good argument that some of Huey’s music had more depth than Petty’s. More creative arrangements, etc....
That's what I was thinking as well. Huey and the News found a nice niche that wasn't being taken care of in the then new MTV terrain. They weren't synth pop (new wave) and they weren't hair metal, but they were good at being a regular rock and roll band with some catchy tunes and videos. Sure did work for 'em.
Tom and Huey both had (very) brief appearances in major motion pictures. For the record (heh), I much prefer Lewis' turn as the teacher/talent evaluator.
Petty was great, but this is pretentious silliness ... what's "believing" a singer? Call me a Philistine, but the No. 1 overriding factor in whether I listen to any kind of music ... rock, pop, country, classical or otherwise ... is whether it entertains my ears, mic drop. If the person making the music has something profound or important to say, wonderful, but I ain't listening to his/her take unless he/she entertains my ears.
This is from 1992, so it's missing tracks from the five studio albums that came out afterwards, but it has all of the big hits: The Heart of Rock & Roll – The Best of Huey Lewis and The News
Yeah, I also consider that to be nonsense and a general misunderstanding of what's going on with most music, which isn't typically a confessional. It's basically "rockist" dogma, and more specifically an example of the rockist "authenticity" dogma.
I think it comes down to what people respond to most in music. Music or lyrics or somewhere in between. But, after Dylan, there was a snobby faction within rock that every song had to "mean something". Not saying our forum members that prefer Petty are snobs, not at all. They just like their music with more lyrical depth. Having said that, I'd argue that "Stuck With You" is actually a very deep song lyrically. Just very economical in how it presents it's message. I'm a Petty fan too. Obviously he had the more substantial career, due in no small part to his songwriting chops. Huey tried to branch out too though, the audience just wasn't really having it.
