A century of musical styles driven by developments in amplification?

[paulbuzz]

Ok, just for fun and discussion, here's my proposition:

The last hundred years (or thereabouts) of popular musical styles have been driven and guided by developments in amplification.

Disclaimer: I'm certainly not claiming that any of this is original thought; I'm just putting it together in this form here for the fun of getting other people's thoughts and input on these ideas.
It's entirely likely that, to paraphrase somebody or other, anything here that's true is probably not original, and anything that's original is probably not true... 😉
So anyway...:

Before amplification was widely used in popular music, singers had to be loud to be heard.
Various stylised foms of singing were developed that allowed for maximum volume; music hall, light opera, blues shouters, etc.

When microphones and early amplification became available, vocalists were able sing much more quietly and naturalistically whilst still being audible over the band; hence the crooners and their intimate stylings.

Now it was guitarists who were struggling for audibility against the blare of the big band, so following the lead of early adopters such as Charlie Christian, the guitar amplifier became popular.
This allowed for the development of 'lead guitar', and onwards to small groups using guitars as the main instrumentation.
Loud singing again frequently became necessary to compete with the rising beat of rock'n'roll...

Guitarists increasingly found that there was something special and exciting about the distorted sound of a guitar amplifier pushed beyond its design limits.
They experimented with larger and larger amplifiers, and new music arose based on those sounds, with Jimi Hendrix as its most visible pioneer.

Now it was singers who were struggling again: trying to make vocals audible over the din of massive overdriven guitar stacks was a task largely beyond the capabilities of early 1970s vocal PAs.
Singers were back to howling at maximum volume in an attempt to be heard; eg Robert Plant and the behemoths of 1970s heavy rock.

This spurred great developments in PA systems, allowing much greater overall volume, and crucially, with the advent of effective subs and high powered amps, previously unthinkable levels of bass frequencies.
This new capability led to the rise of bass-powered dance music in its many forms, from reggae through rave, d'n'b, dubstep and the panoply of other bass-driven styles that have dominated popular music until today.

So... anyone for any elaboration, correction, rebuttal or just plain contradiction...? 😁

[chris_b]

Before microphones singers used acoustic megaphones.

[skankdelvar]

4 hours ago, paulbuzz said:

here's my proposition

It has much to recommend it.

I would add that the development of the guitar amplifier permitted blues guitarists to translate acoustic Delta Blues into the amplified Chicago form which - having achieved sectional popularity - merged with country music to give birth to Rock 'n' Roll which itself influenced the Stones and The Beatles, giving shape to the twin predominant strands (blues-based / pop-based) of Rock, the musical genre which flourished from the early '60's to the mid-90's and which continues to inform the common cultural paradigm embraced by approximately 92% of BC's membership.

TLDR: No guitar amps > no Chicago Blues > no Rock > prolly no BassChat.

[SICbass]

So essentially the whole thing is driven by the ego battle between the guitarist and the singer. Who knew? 😘

[Graham]

I'd argue that recording technology and techniques has played a key role too

[Mykesbass]

43 minutes ago, Graham said:

I'd argue that recording technology and techniques has played a key role too

And I'd counter your argument to say the OP's suggestion is far more significant. The amplification in my opinion led the changes. Recording technology had to keep pace.

[scalpy]

The suggestion is very close to my own thoughts, however I'd suggest like the earlier post you have to couple live and recording technology. Both have been stretched and the next musical innovation has been driven by people who have maximised the potential of the resource, that stayed on the edge of a theoretical financial threshold. 90s rave culture couldn't have happened with the resources available in the 70s for instance. Synths on first issue were ridiculously expensive, but digital tech made them 'obsolete' and viable to young musicians.  Live sound remained heavy and cumbersome but serious power was becoming available that wasn't astronomical in price. You get exceptions like punk for example, but it could be argued even they were maximising the technology available cheaply (not forgetting never mind the b******* was recorded at AIR studios) Today we have people rinsing every available bit of processing power out of their laptops, and this has happily in my opinion given rise to groups like Snarky Puppy and Vulfpeck who couple it with a video editing aesthetic as well. You also have to factor in the people that sell mainstream music want to pay as few people as possible, but that's probably a different thread entirely!

[Cat Burrito]

I've read a lot of stuff around the bass playing a massive part in the birth of rock 'n' roll in that once the instrument was amplified it really gave the music something people could dance to. There's plenty of great rock 'n' roll with upright bass but I like the theory.

[wateroftyne]

I’d go with the electric bass being the catalyst for a lot of it.

Suddenly, the drummer could hear the bass player... and up went the volume.

[chris_b]

5 hours ago, skankdelvar said:

. . .  . . . No guitar amps > no Chicago Blues > no Rock > prolly no BassChat.

Sadly, no slavery no music I like!

[Skinnyman]

9 hours ago, paulbuzz said:

So... anyone for any elaboration, correction, rebuttal or just plain contradiction...? 😁

This is Basschat. You'll get all four before the morning's out.

Probably from the same person.

In the same post. 😂

In all seriousness, I like the theory. I think other things may have had an influence (not least recording technology as mentioned above) but at macro level, it's a reasonable hypothesis that if it were made into a four-part documentary series, I would watch with interest.

 

[DaveFry]

at 7:35 J. B. Dyas , bassist and Jazz educator , claims that the most important person in Jazz history is Thomas Edison for enabling New Orleans to party all night with electric light .