Why Didn't The AC/DC Style Originate In America?

An album? Why an album? I'm asking very seriously: is it not music to you if it's not presented to you in an album?

AC/DC's sources would have been UK filtered and as I remember it the heaviest big sellers were Black Sabbath and T. Rex. That movie of T. Rex that Ringo directed -- I forget the title, Born to Boogie perhaps? -- that thing is just sheer pounding heaviness all the way through, guaranteed to shred speakers. Last time I saw it was about 2009, in Liverpool on TV, and while I was watching it I thought, this thing never ever lets up -- it's like Blue Cheer or something. My host who was watching it with me said "it reminds me of Slade."

Hawkwind comes to mind thinking about pre AC/DC heaviness. They had the space angle and synthesizers but they were also very riffy -- songs were little more than riffs pounded into your brain for 7-10 minutes at a time -- that's not to say it's not great -- it really is great but I could picture the Young brothers being major Hawkwind fans. The Deviants, Pink Fairies and the whole Ladbroke Grove festival scene come to mind too.

 

Excellent post.

 

I don’t think the Ramones sound like AC/DC at all. Very different guitar. Distorted Marshall amps? Sure, they have that in common. But Johnny Ramone’s guitar sound was like a buzzsaw, not anything I would describe as “crunch” to it. And the guy was down-picking pretty fast through the entirety of most of their early songs. I can’t think of an example of Malcolm doing that. Malcolm Young’s rhythm guitar parts, on the other hand, had a complexity to the movement from chord to chord, compared with Johnny Ramone’s barre chords.

Also, the Ramones were significantly faster than most of AC/DC’s songs.

 

Creedence clearwater revival maybe ?

 

Also also, the Ramones didn’t have guitar solos in their music until later on, and then only rarely. I think the guitar solos are pretty important to what makes AC/DC AC/DC.

 

Nah, CCR were more roots rock, country and blues. Excellent band though. A favorite for sure.

 

Great point. I was thinking 'heavy' with my comparison between the two, and the fact that some of their songs have structures similar to early rock.

 

AC/DC is riff heavy rock a lot of the time. A song like Jimi Hendrix's "Fire" and "Foxy Lady" is a kind of riff-heavy rock, a bit moreso than "Purple Haze". Basic and sparse riff-led rock. I haven't really seen anyone claim AC/DC were innovative like it seems you may be getting at-but just great meat n' potatoes rock.

 

I think the style itself originated in BOTH the UK and America with heavy blues rock bands like the ones that have already been mentioned: the Stones, the Who, Zeppelin, Sabbath, Cream, Jimi, Blue Cheer, Mountain, Montrose, UFO, even the Kinks... it's just that AC/DC absorbed all of it, got to the common denominator, and made whole albums based on it.

EDIT: Don't forget ZZ Top. That would be the American equivalent in my opinion. Maybe Grand Funk too?

 

For the OP, as he wasn't familiar with Status Quo. I think this one's pretty close.

 

Both formed around the same time. AC/DC late '73, Ramones early '74.
But I don't see them as similar bands at all, for all their speed and noise Ramones had a lighter touch, especially early on.

 

and lets not forget that an AC/DC member used the name Velvet Underground for awhile!

The *other* Velvet Underground featured a future AC/DC founder and a singer who set himself on fire

 

Why? Would you concede that UK bands have been innovative over the years, and if so why don’t you think bands from other countries could be too, or is it just Australians that you don’t think would be up to it?

 

The music could've come from anywhere the bathroom wall poetry from Bon is very Aussie however.

 

Not sure why anyone would expect the 'AC/DC sound' to have originated in USA. Up to that point (and arguably beyond), essentially zilch hard rock & worthwhile derivatives originated in USA. If it wasn't for The Stooges & NY Dolls, it would be zilch.

 

@ 59 seconds

 

I think you're on to something with the glam bands you mention. I'd add T. Rex to the mix. 20th Century Boy and Bang a Gong are obvious examples of three chords and a cloud of dust guitar. I'd be interested to know if the Youngs were fans of The Kinks. It's not a big stretch to get from You Really Got Me to Dirty Deeds.

 

That's what I am asking - why was there zilch from America. No one in the U.S. thought "what if we played 'Jailhouse Rock' through a Marshall stack?" Maybe the technology hadn't been invented yet?

 

I agree. Songs like 'Jeepster' were heading in the direction of amplified rockabilly. The distorted intro to 20th Century Boy - wow.

 

My thought exactly when I saw this post.

 

I really shouldn't have to explain this - rock music came from America, as did Leo Fender and Les Paul.

The first electric guitar amplifier was likely made by Leo Fender and was a modified valve-based public address amplifier. Fender's early guitar amplifiers had no controls and simply amplified the electric signal produced by early magnetic pickups. Although early prototypes exist, the first commercially produced guitar amplifier was made by Fender in 1947.

 

But it wasn't really zilch. Blue Cheer, Hendrix, Mountain, Iron Butterfly, Montrose, ZZ Top, the Stooges, the NY Dolls... they were all heavy rock and blues based American bands. They just never developed that essential style nor based whole albums on it. Bands wanted varied albums, AC/DC never cared about that.

 

The MC5 were recording Little Richard covers in 1970. The Flaming Groovies were taking 50's rock and making it louder in 1969.

 

Fine examples too.

 

You didn't have to explain it. AC/DC formed in 1973. There's no reason for their sound to have originated in the U.S. Their sound could've just as easily originated in the U.K, like all the great UK acts from the 70s. But it didn't. It originated in Australia. Asking why their sound didn't originate in America is a very American-centric way of thinking.