Sex Pistols or the Clash?

Pistols or Clash?

  • Sex Pistols

    Votes: 4 57.1%
  • The Clash

    Votes: 3 42.9%

  • Total voters
    7

SecondBass

New member
After the fun with the Beatles and the Stones I have to go to my real love of punk music. As I'm from England I can tell you that opinion is heavily divided over who was the best band. Like the Beatles and Stones they have different basic styles, they were lumped together because they were new, loud and London, thus creating a very diverse genre.

Who do you like the most?
 

Museo

New member
That's a very difficult decision to make SecondBass. If you were to look at which band had the most influence on music, it would have to be the Sex Pistols. However I preferred the sound of The Clash.
 

SecondBass

New member
There we differ!

I always preferred the Pistols, but it is only the one album that counts: Never Mind the Bollocks is a near-perfect album. I found the Clash's politics suspect and didn't like being patronised by Joe Strummer, nor did I like his voice.
 

Museo

New member
I was too young at the time to know of Clash's politics but remember jumping up and down at school discos to "Rock the Casbar". I liked both the Sex Pistols and the Clash.
 

SecondBass

New member
I remember being in the Sixth Form doing the school disco and the First and Second years loved 'Frigging in the Rigging' by the Pistols (from the cartoon period). Had the Headmaster arrive on us in the middle of it and he, fortunately, wasn't listening to the lyrics.
 

Pompey

New member
I've gone for the Clash because I liked their version of 'I Fought the Law' which was superb. I didn't really like the reggae stuff like 'White Man in Hammersmith Palais' but the faster stuff was great.
 

SecondBass

New member
I don't believe that The Clash is leading the Pistols, even if only three people have voted. 'I Fought the Law' was good but it was a cover version, it should have been a Buddy Holly song but he had a bit of an accident.
 

Cobalt

New member
I voted for Sex Pistols based on the fact they sum up perfectly what punk music is all about. It's loud, it's brash, it's inelegant, and at times, completely vulgar - but that's what it was all about.

The Clash always seemed a little more "flowery" to me - some of their tracks seemed like punk toned-down. Though I love the reggae influences they combined with many of their tracks, a lot of it for me just isn't punk.

Without doubt The Clash had more musical talent, but the lyrics of The Pistols was pure genious and having essentially defined punk, definitely get my vote.
 

SecondBass

New member
Hang on - the Clash had more musical talent?

When the bands first started the Pistols had two people that could play their instruments - Paul Cook and Glenn Matlock - and with the raw energy of Steve Jones plus John Lydon's extraordinary vocals, they really had a legitimate band.

The Clash were all useless at the beginning, they needed Topper Headon to come along as a proper drummer to make Paul Simonen learn his instrument. Joe Strummer never had a vocal style to write home about despite his annoying pontifications. This was all after the fact.

Pistols won by a mile as far as I'm concerned.
 

John Watt

Member
With only three votes, my so far non-vote might be worth something here.
But, culturally, as a Canadian thinking globally, I need some help to decide.

The songs "London's Calling" and "New Years Eve" were covered by U2.
I think that is a great compliment for the original song writers,
even if U2 had big coloured hair and were trying to be new wave at the time.
They were huge dance hits over here.
Which band orginally did those songs?

Johnny Rotten gets a lot of publicity for his new groups and recordings over here,
even though I've never heard them.
Is he the one musician from these bands that has kept growing in musicianship,
and his career, the most?

The answers to those questions will determine my vote.
 
Top