Musicians who never take drugs

[ska invita]

They weren't high when they were writing or recording though. Listen to 'And Your Bird Can Sing', you can't do that when you're off your head.

so what? drugs effect you to the core, not just when you are on them.

 

[ska invita]

Speaking from personal experience, if you haven't learn to play your instrument properly yet and then you take some drugs you still won't be able to play your instrument properly.

of course! hah if only it was that easy...

If you had a time machine and you could go and watch them work, you'd probably find that even a lot of the famously druggy musicians were pretty sober when they were actually writing or recording. Except maybe Primal Scream, sat there twatted in a corner while Andrew Weatherall did all their work for them.

drugs affect you to the core, not just to the moment, so its definitely best to sober up for the session.

Weatherall did remixes of PS tracks, not their work for them.

ot that I'm anti drugs. Maybe if Frank Zappa had had a spliff or a couple of beers, he might have put one of his own records on and finally realised hey, this is fucking garbage, I should quit music and become a maths teacher.

never knew Zappa was nondruggy, but maybe there is a relation between that and why i dont like his music?

 

[SpookyFrank]

so what? drugs effect you to the core, not just when you are on them.

Do they?

 

[ska invita]

Do they?

yes

 

[SpookyFrank]

Do they though?

 

[Idris2002]

jazz is steeped in drug use though, theres no denying that - its a huge influence on the sound - i can hear it anyhow. uppers in the early days moving into plenty opiates and cannaboids from 30-50s, hitting the psychedelics in the 60s and 70s - in fact sober jazz is that 80s sound (maybe a bit of coke)

Am I right in assuming that John Coltrane was a heavy LSD user, judging by the way his sound evolved in his last years?

 

[ska invita]

Do they though?

they do, yes. depends on the drug and how regularly you take it, but yes.
Magical Mystery Tour & Sgt Peppers are a direct result of acid taking ... they didnt need to be on acid in the studio, it changed their minds about how to approach music (and life)

 

[ska invita]

Am I right in assuming that John Coltrane was a heavy LSD user, judging by the way his sound evolved in his last years?

i dont know for certain but seems highly highly likely - also id expect alice coltrane and associated guys like pharoah sanders to definitely have been hitting the psychedelics....
it is possible to get to these sonic spaces 'sober', with meditation techniques, religious transcendentalism, studying pure theory even etc, but drugs are the most common route....

 

[D'wards]

Maybe not better musicians but maybe they could make better music or be a bit less clinical. I've seen a few gigs where I'd be better off at home listening to the album. Drenge, The Bots and The Amazing Snakeheads come to mind.

But Beck never takes drugs and he is one of the best live artists i've seen - puts a lot of thought into his performances

 

[SpookyFrank]

What about Bach? He came up with a lot of new shit, was he on acid?

 

[isvicthere?]

They weren't high when they were writing or recording though. Listen to 'And Your Bird Can Sing', you can't do that when you're off your head.

I don't think ska invita is suggesting they were on drugs when they recorded; just that drugs inspired them to write different or more interesting music. There's only a year between "Help" and "Tomorrow never knows", but they're worlds apart. And I'd be very surprised if the latter didn't have some sort of entheogenic inspiration.

 

[ManchesterBeth]

Hicks makes a fair point though, which is all the beatles groundbreaking material was a direct result of their drug taking - up to that point they were the Westlife of their day

All their so-called inventive stuff either ripped off Daphne Oram and the BBC radiophonic workshop and/or Ravi Shankar.

Like, I just don't see how they pushed anything forward. Coltrane and Sanders were doing much more inventive stuff around that time, and for a rock precedent you've got Red Krayola and British prog a few years a la VDGG and Crimson after 67.

 

[ska invita]

All their so-called inventive stuff either ripped off Daphne Oram and the BBC radiophonic workshop and/or Ravi Shankar.

care to prove it?

 

[isvicthere?]

jazz is steeped in drug use though, theres no denying that - its a huge influence on the sound - i can hear it anyhow. uppers in the early days moving into plenty opiates and cannaboids from 30-50s, hitting the psychedelics in the 60s and 70s - in fact sober jazz is that 80s sound (maybe a bit of coke)

Pretty much every form of popular music since recording technology began has some sort of drug inspiring/shaping it.

Some examples:-

Blues: pot
Jazz: pot, later heroin
'50s rock'n'roll: amphetamines
'60s revolution rock: pot, acid, then later heroin
Punk: speed
Dance era: E

There's a good book called (I think) "Waiting for the man: the story of drugs and popular music" which covers this in detail.

 

[ManchesterBeth]

care to prove it?

Well, I'm not sure what you're talking about here tbf. If you're talking about songwriting then that's not my area of expertise but if you're talking about sonic innovation then have this

 

[killer b]

Like, I just don't see how they pushed anything forward.

I hate the beatles as much as anyone, but this is pompous beardy guff.

 

[jakethesnake]

The members of Hawkwind.

never ever taken any drugs whatsoever

Lemmy kind of got kicked out of Hawkwind for doing too much drugs - even for them!

 

[gosub]

What about Bach? He came up with a lot of new shit, was he on acid?

if he ate rye bread, possibly.

 

[Orang Utan]

Talented musicians impress non musicians with innovation and virtuosity. Imaginatively barren non musicians assume it must be drugs. Yawn.

 

[ffsear]

I believe 1 one the Chemical Brothers dosen't. The other one, Ed, does enough for both of them!

 

[Orang Utan]

Sqidgy hash smoking take me to your dealer poster on the wall pink floyd listening teenage bullshit

 

[ska invita]

Well, I'm not sure what you're talking about here tbf. If you're talking about songwriting then that's not my area of expertise but if you're talking about sonic innovation then have this

the beatles in that era are not a rip off of anyone - its a huge insult to say it is - all musicians draw on other music going around at the time and before - the idea that sgt peppers is a rehash of ravi shankar and daphne o is a million miles off the mark. give credit where its due D.

Talented musicians impress non musicians with innovation and virtuosity. Imaginatively barren non musicians assume it must be drugs. Yawn.

of course its not as easy as take drugs and become a visionary musician, but don't discount the completely central role drugs play in inspiring music and creating music traditions

 

[isvicthere?]

Talented musicians impress non musicians with innovation and virtuosity. Imaginatively barren non musicians assume it must be drugs. Yawn.

What about talented musicians who write songs explicitly about drugs? We could all come up with a long list.

 

[Belushi]

Drugs are ace but they're also the quickest way to turn you into a bore known to man.

 

[hot air baboon]

And both massive dickheads. Coincidence or a pattern?

....you can add Ted Nugent...so pattern then....

Lemmy kind of got kicked out of Hawkwind for doing too much drugs - even for them!

...for doing the wrong sort of drugs ...( speed )

 

[isvicthere?]

Drugs are ace but they're also the quickest way to turn you into a bore known to man.

Whatever do you mean?

 

[Pickman's model]

Hicks makes a fair point though, which is all the beatles groundbreaking material was a direct result of their drug taking - up to that point they were the Westlife of their day

quite a few of the stones' '60s songs clearly drug-related e.g. stoned.

 

[Sweet FA]

....you can add Ted Nugent...so pattern then....

Also Mugabe and Pinochet. Not musicians but shows you the sort of people we're dealing with here.

 

[danny la rouge]

Hicks makes a fair point though, which is all the beatles groundbreaking material was a direct result of their drug taking - up to that point they were the Westlife of their day

There is no Beatles music made before they got into drugs. They were into speed when they first hit the charts.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Talented musicians impress non musicians with innovation and virtuosity. Imaginatively barren non musicians assume it must be drugs. Yawn.

I've been known to snap at people who listen to my music and say, 'you're really gifted' or words to that effect. No, I'm not fucking gifted. I started out ham-fisted and tone deaf and I put in a shitload of work over many years. What talent I may have, I fucking well earned