Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: AC/DC "Back in Black" 30th Anniversary

This is topic AC/DC "Back in Black" 30th Anniversary in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=006214

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 07-26-2010, 10:18 AM:

This past weekend, Sunday to be exact, marked the 30th anniversary of the release of Back in Black by the Australian rock group AC/DC.

Back in Black is one of my favorite hard rock albums. If I were asked to put together a top 5 or top 10 list of greatest rock albums ever released this album absolutely would have to be included in the list. The album has an enduring popularity few other rock albums can match. Roughly half of the songs on the album still remain in heavy rotation on rock oriented radio stations. You Shook Me All Night Long is a staple tune in many dance clubs. The recent Iron Man movies have given the music another popularity boost. The music from Back in Black arguably has a timeless quality in that it doesn't fit into the usual hard rock/metal genres that have become dated over the years. The music, like it or not, clearly stands on its own.

Back in Black is an album that might not have ever been made. Many expected AC/DC to break up when the band's front man, Bon Scott died. Instead, the group lucked out in hiring Brian Johnson and having legendary producer Robert John "Mutt" Lange on hand to go into the studio and crank out a work dedicated to Bon Scott. The result was an ass-kicking, beer chugging, two-fisted classic.

I still have my old vinyl LP of Back in Black, purchased back in 1980 when I was just a kid. Several years later I bought a CD version of it.

The enduring popularity of Back in Black has resulted in over 49 million copies sold, making it the #2 best selling music album worldwide and best selling album ever for a rock band. Thriller by Michael Jackson is the only album to sell more copies.

AC/DC is still one of the most popular touring rock bands in terms of ticket sales. Over the last year the band ranked in the top 5 on touring grosses. U2 made the most money. This is according to report I heard on one of our local rock radio stations last week.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 07-26-2010, 10:35 AM:

I agree with everything stated here. It's a great album for sure. The CD was re-released a few years ago with all the original album graphics (including the embossed cover) restored and it sounds great. I'm not really a heavy metal fan but this album is balls-out excellent. "Shoot to Thrill" is my personal favorite song on the album.

I do have an issue with the #2 ranking of sales though....I think Thriller is #1 followed by the Eagles' "Greatest Hits." Those two albums have been battling it out for the top honors for years.

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 07-26-2010, 12:31 PM:

I agree that AC/DC's "Back In Black" is a great album! I definitely would include it if I was to be stranded on a desert island and could only bring along a few albums.

"Back In Black" is noted as a great cross-over album, appealing to many who generally dislike hard rock and heavy metal. Everyone I know who hates hard rock has "Back In Black" in their CD collection, similar to, say, Miles Davis' "Kind Of Blue" being the lone jazz album in collections of those who dislike or are unfamiliar with jazz, or Bob Marley's "Greatest Hits" for those dislike/don't know reggae.

All this talk about "Back In Black" reminds me of how great a year 1980 was for hard rock and heavy metal. In no particular order, I can recall the following:

Judas Priest's "British Steel"
Van Halen's "Women And Children First"
Queen's "The Game"
Black Sabbath's "Heaven And Hell"
Scorpions' "Animal Magnetism"
Rush's "Permanent Waves"
Journey's "Departure"
REO Speedwagon's "Hi Infidelity"

Also in 1980 the first inkling of "The New Wave Of British Heavy Metal" brought us the debut albums from Def Leppard and Iron Maiden, neither of which, in my opinion, are the band's best work, but certainly gave us a taste of things to come.

Some sources cite 1981 release dates for Styx's "Paradise Theatre" and Ozzy Osbourne's "Blizzard Of Ozz," though both were produced in and carry a 1980 copyright. Should these count?

And, on the opposite side of the spectrum, 1980 brought us Kiss' "Unmasked," which pretty much solidified the band's downfall.

I was in junior high school in 1980 and on the verge of discovering most of the bands I cited. I can recall many of the kids in school wearing the concert shirts and talking favorably about the music. Who would have thought that thirty years later, I would consider many of the albums mentioned among my all-time favorites and several of which I'll confess to have purchased multiple times (LP and/or cassette, then on CD, and, in many cases, re-mastered/re-issued CDs).

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 07-26-2010, 01:10 PM:

...and my daughter gave me a new 200grm collectable vinyl of this album this year for my b-day. She's and avid AC/DC fan as well.

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 07-26-2010, 01:12 PM:

quote: Michael Coate
Some sources cite 1981 release dates for Styx's "Paradise Theatre" and Ozzy Osbourne's "Blizzard Of Ozz," though both were produced in and carry a 1980 copyright. Should these count?

And, on the opposite side of the spectrum, 1980 brought us Kiss' "Unmasked," which pretty much solidified the band's downfall.

I was in junior high school in 1980 and on the verge of discovering most of the bands I cited. I can recall many of the kids in school wearing the concert shirts and talking favorably about the music. Who would have thought that thirty years later, I would consider many of the albums mentioned among my all-time favorites and several of which I'll confess to have purchased multiple times (LP and/or cassette, then on CD, and, in many cases, re-mastered/re-issued CDs).

The Ozzy Osbourne Blizzard of Oz LP was first released in the UK in late 1980 then released in the USA in early 1981. The follow-up Diary of a Madman was recorded in 1980 some time shortly after the first albums release yet it was not released until late 1981. Both these recordings should be avoided in any remastered pressing. They do not include the original bass or drum tracks on them.

As for Kiss Unmasked it was not the worst LP but definitely on the other side of the career peak. It also did not have any drum tracks recorded by Peter Criss. They were done by Anton Figg of David Letterman's show band.

As for AC/DC's Back in Black, that's the album that almost didn't happen. After the death of Bon Scott, Angus Young was considering throwing in the towel until he stepped into an Australian Nightclub and heard the screams of Brian Johnson.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 07-26-2010, 01:13 PM:

I went to an AC/DC concert when I was a child, like all the kids did. To this day it is only one of two concerts I've ever been to (not a big fan of the concert-going experience). I got a lot of flack for listening to AC/DC because, of course, they worship the devil. They fired blanks from a canon several times. It was kind of loud, y'know? The shitfest known as "Fastway" was the opening act. I never really understood opening acts. Rush doesn't have opening acts from what I hear, but I am still not paying $80 for a ticket to their concert at Red Rocks. I certainly wouldn't consider Rush, REO Speedwagon or Journey to be in the hard rock category. Rush could be rock, the other two maybe "lite rock".

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 07-26-2010, 01:25 PM:

quote: Joe Redifer
The shitfest known as "Fastway" was the opening act.

Fastway was formed in 1982 by former Motorhead guitarist Fast Eddie Clark and Former UFO bassist Pete Way. The Fast and the Way in the bands name. Pete Way left the band before the first LP even came out. Fastway opened for Rush when I saw them in 1984.

Rush quit using opening acts in 1996 and started having shows that ran 2 1/2 to 3 hours long.

Posted by Pravin Ratnam (Member # 1417) on 07-26-2010, 01:42 PM:

Back in Black is one of the greatest hard rock albums. Never considered them metal though such terms can vary from person to person.

After Back in Black, they seemed stuck in a rut until the Money Talks album. Just no nonsense rock n roll. Some critics may have downplayed their excellence, but if no nonsense rock was so easy, you wouldn't have mediocre bands like Chickenfoot.

Posted by Sam Graham (Member # 2889) on 07-26-2010, 01:52 PM:

I don't have a whole lot of back catalog stuff in my collection anymore, particularly when it comes to rock, but I do have "Back in Black".

And since somebody else brought up Rush...If you haven't seen Rush's "Beyond the Lighted Stage", get the Blu-ray and do so immediately.

Posted by Richard Hamilton (Member # 321) on 07-26-2010, 02:41 PM:

My ears are still ringing from the canons from "for those about to rock"! The loudest concert ever.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 07-26-2010, 04:41 PM:

Rush is "art rock." Journey, REO and some of those others are "pop rock." They have hard rock elements in their sound but pop is definitely the dominant element in their most popular work. But Michael did say rock and metal in his post, so he wasn't saying those bands are metal bands.

I had forgotten all about Fastway. We sold a few of their albums back in the day. They were one of those bands that came on big and fizzled fast before they really got going.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 07-26-2010, 07:27 PM:

He said hard rock and heavy metal, not just rock by itself.

If AC/DC isn't heavy metal, then what is? Iron Maiden? Their sound isn't any "heavier" than AC/DC's. One thing I do not like is death metal, mostly because it sounds like shit... unless it's this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pT7OZE66Q0

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 07-26-2010, 09:00 PM:

AC/DC is heavy metal but Journey and REO Speedwagon most definitely are not, nor are they hard rock either...although REO comes closer. ("Ridin' the Storm Out" -- great track, especially live. The studio version sucks.)

I almost saw Journey in that classic Denver venue, McNichols Arena -- but when the tickets arrived in the mail and had "OBSTRUCTED VIEW" printed on them, I opted not to make the 600 mile drive. Dumbass ticket selling moron didn't mention THAT fact when he told me they were great seats close to the stage.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 07-26-2010, 09:37 PM:

I don't think of AC/DC as being "heavy metal." The band definitely plays heavy sounding music, but I think it is more rooted in blues than it is in metal. Maybe a frame of reference could be George Thorogood & The Destroyers but a tougher sounding with a slight influence of punk. It's really difficult to pigeon-hole the band's sound even though it is raw, straight-forward hard rock and roll. AC/DC just has their own sound.

Maybe that's the best compliment for any long-lived rock band. Rush has their own sound. So does Journey. Same for U2. Some "dinosaur" acts are able to get away with changing and refining their sound. AC/DC has done some slight refining over the years but largely has gone with the strategy of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."

BTW, AC/DC's 1993 hit Big Gun was the primary reason why I bought a copy of The Last Action Hero soundtrack. That CD has a number of other great tunes, but Big Gun is awesome.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 07-26-2010, 09:53 PM:

Ug. I have a hard time telling the difference between most U2 songs. Why they are so popular I'll never know.

Posted by Pravin Ratnam (Member # 1417) on 07-26-2010, 10:10 PM:

Maybe Bobby can help me out here as i am illiterate when it comes to musical instrument and sounds terminology. I just go by the sound. For me AC DC is hard rock played LOUD which is not necessarily heavy metal. It's like GNR versus the other hair bands of the 80s. GNR was more of a rock n roll band to me than those other hair bands. Metallica is more metal to me. just the nature of the guitar sound, the drum style, the tone of the vocals(either high pitched or really low pitched extremes). Themes, I guess play into the metal vs hard rock distinction. Metal has so many subgenres (death metal, regular heavy metal, goth metal, speed metal, and ughh- hair metal). I don't see AC DC fitting any of those.

I can see Otis Redding sing his version of Shook Me All Night Long, or Jams Brown sing Back in Black but I can't see either of them sing One by metallica(if brought back to life, of course). I think AC DC just play traditional rock n roll really loud. Angus's riffs reflect that old influence.

U2 , come on . All their music doesnt sound the same They had three phases. The inital , the Joshua Tree, and then the Bono in Hugeass Shades phase.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 07-26-2010, 10:12 PM:

I preferred the early stuff from U2. The Joshua Tree and Achtung Baby were very successful albums and have a number of great tunes, but U2 just grew more mainstream sounding. Incidentally, U2 released its first studio album Boy in 1980.

Damn, 1980 was just a great freaking year for music. Pink Floyd: The Wall doesn't really qualify as a 1980 release since it hit store shelves near the end of 1979. But Another Brick in the Wall Part 2 dominated airwaves in 1980. I remember buying a copy of Zenyatta Mondatta by The Police in 1980. I was a huge Queen fan and The Game was a great album even though it differed in style from Jazz and News of the World.

Maybe I'm just out of touch or too damned old, but I have a hard time getting into music from very many new bands. I still buy CDs from time to time but more often than not the purchases are directed at older bands like Stone Temple Pilots than newer acts like The Strokes or Three Days Grace.

quote: Pravin Ratnam
For me AC DC is hard rock played LOUD which is not necessarily heavy metal. It's like GNR versus the other hair bands of the 80s. GNR was more of a rock n roll band to me than those other hair bands. Metallica is more metal to me. just the nature of the guitar sound, the drum style, the tone of the vocals(either high pitched or really low pitched extremes).

Those are good examples. Although Metallica arguably defined the standard of speed metal (as I glance at my old vinyl LP of Kill 'Em All) the band definitely had its own distinctive sound -one that has endured and become classic. The recent movie Zombieland had a wonderful opening title sequence featuring Metallica's hit For Whom the Bell Tolls. Guns & Roses definitely had a sound that differed from the usual "hair band" pop metal of the late 1980s. The band might have survived and made a lot more music if not for Axl Rose's stunts that undermined the band.

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 07-27-2010, 01:16 AM:

quote: Darryl Spicer
After the death of Bon Scott, Angus Young was considering throwing in the towel until he stepped into an Australian Nightclub and heard the screams of Brian Johnson.

...who was having a bad case of appendicitis why he was screaming, laying on the floor ... and later help AC/DC come up with the 2nd greatest selling album behind MJ's "Thriller" album.

..not bad for for a lead singer's first album with a new group.

RUSH: definitely progrssive rock

Posted by Chad Souder (Member # 343) on 07-27-2010, 10:10 AM:

It seems to depend on the source. According to RIAA top 100 , Back in Black is 5th. But it hardly matters. It's a terrific album.

My only problem with the Brian Johnson led AC/DC is that they lost diversity from what they had with Scott. Ride On was a great song off Dirty Deeds, and Big Balls was just funny. Scott could pull off those songs because of his great vocals - he could sing loud or soft. Johnson did loud well - very well - but there was no delicacy there. It limited the band. I loved Razor's Edge though.

Regarding "Heavy Metal," AC/DC most definitely fits into the category, although they always refer to themselves as rock and roll. The term refers generically to rhythm, harmonic structure and guitar sound. There are many sub-genres of Heavy Metal and in the past 3 decades bands started this game of oneupmanship to see who could play faster, louder, etc., often sacrificing good sound.

Metallica was the first Thrash band, one of the many Heavy Metal sub-genres. Their unique style and sound largely came from Cliff Burton's classical music background. They incorporated really good music into their shredding. When Cliff died, so too did their great songwriting. They just went commercial after that and someone convinced James he could actually sing. [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Richard Hamilton (Member # 321) on 07-27-2010, 10:22 AM:

A band I used to be a roadie for. Chet and the Molesters

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 07-27-2010, 11:54 AM:

quote: Chad Souder
It seems to depend on the source. According to RIAA top 100 , Back in Black is 5th. But it hardly matters. It's a terrific album.

AC/DC Back in Black is the 5th best selling album of all time in the United States with 22 million copies sold. Worldwide, Back in Black has sold over 49 million copies which gives it the #2 worldwide rank.

Posted by Chad Souder (Member # 343) on 07-27-2010, 01:53 PM:

And any expert will tell you that while compiling accurate data in the US is difficult enough, determining foreign sales is nearly impossible. If you notice on the Wikipedia article you looked at, but didn't cite, all those album sales cite different sources. If foreign information was accurate, it would be available in one place. But its not. Much of the world doesn't keep information like we do, or they bootleg like you wouldn't believe, which is why the RIAA is one of the very few respected sources worldwide. If you have a reliable (not Wikifuckinpedia) source that has accurate worldwide data, please tell us. It would be the first I've ever seen.

But like I said, it hardly matters since its a terrific album.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 07-27-2010, 03:34 PM:

quote: Joe Redifer
Ug. I have a hard time telling the difference between most U2 songs.

Gotta agree with you there. I like some of their older stuff but it does all tend to sound alike after a while. I think they are a great live show, that could explain some of the frenzy. Plus they're an institution.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 07-27-2010, 11:49 PM:

quote: Chad Souder
And any expert will tell you that while compiling accurate data in the US is difficult enough, determining foreign sales is nearly impossible.

That may be, but there is a LOT more of the world than just the United States of America. So the 22 million units sold figure just here in the US alone is far from the total for unit sales on Back in Black.

It isn't my job, certainly not a paid one either, to keep track of what album sold what units internationally. I'll let someone else bust their ass to bring evidence to dispute AC/DC's #2 rating on the best ever album sold worldwide. Until then I'll happily watch Back in Black sit pretty at #2 worldwide. It isn't hurting me any.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 07-28-2010, 02:59 AM:

quote: Mike Blakesley
Plus they're an institution.

What does that even mean? That they are somehow more than a band? Ug again!

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 07-28-2010, 03:04 AM:

Well...some bands reach a point where they have so many uber-fans who would buy a record of their beer-farts, that anything they do is automatically declared great by the music media. Look at Prince as a great example. Every album he's done for the past 20 years has been unmemorable crap, but every time he poops one out, the Rolling Stone and other mags immediately start declaring it's his "best since Purple Rain" (which was in fact his last really good album).

Probably going to get flamed by a bunch of Prince fans now, but you guys know it's true. He's had flashes of brilliance, but his signal-to-noise ratio has been crappy for decades and you know it.

Posted by Pravin Ratnam (Member # 1417) on 07-28-2010, 09:06 AM:

You got that right. Prince gets way too much slack because he is supposed to be a "genius". I love his 80s stuff. But come on, man. He is not that great where he can just put out anything. I listened to some cuts of an album he released a few years ago. Bland mediocre crap.

The same with Bruce Springsteen. I am a huge fan. But come on, man. Critics like those from Rolling Stone orgasm at every one of his releases. The guy has become too full of himself with some really tired sounding records half the time since the 90s began. I dont mind his acoustic forays, as long as they are within limits. When he does the acoustic or bare bones stuff like the one he sang for one of the Sayles 90s movies, and the Wrestler. But most of the time, it's reedy nasally sounding country twangish pretentious crap. Oh, and he is losing his concert edge too. I have seen some concert footage of him in the last few years and his voice is totally shot and his ever annoying Patty Scialfa just stands there looking like a wax statue doing nothing on stage and his shtick is getting tired. What I do love is when he does those live collaborations for some cause or some special occasion.

Posted by Richard Hamilton (Member # 321) on 07-28-2010, 10:50 AM:

quote: Pravin Ratnam
in the last few years and his voice is totally shot

My cousin plays 4 nights a week, about once a month, he'll spend a day not talking to rest his voice. He won't answer the phone or talk to you if you drop by. I've stopped by his recording studio, and he just looks at me and points to his throat

Posted by Chad Souder (Member # 343) on 07-28-2010, 11:53 AM:

In the mid to late 90's, Prince cranked out a bunch of albums in a relatively short time to satisfy his contract. It was not his best work. Since, he's had some good and some bad. Much average. Its a matter of taste, but there is still some fantastic stuff in there if you have the patience. According to an unsupported statistic from a source I won't cite, Prince is the #1 selling artist of all time worldwide, so he must be the best!

I lost interest in The Boss long ago. Some of these guys get to thinking people care about their opinion and that they can change the world and they forget the only reason people gave them attention in the first place was because their music is good. Bono is another classic example. As a result, their music and their show suffers. They would be better off if they just shut up and focused on being an entertainer, not a wannabe politician.

Posted by Todd McCracken (Member # 4718) on 07-28-2010, 04:26 PM:

AC/DC claimed a good portion of my hearing the first time I saw them. I don't regret it at all [Smile]

FIRE!

Posted by Richard Hamilton (Member # 321) on 07-28-2010, 04:30 PM:

Todd,
I salute you! [beer]

Posted by Chad Souder (Member # 343) on 07-28-2010, 09:18 PM:

As the story goes, AC/DC showed up to a Monsters of Rock show several years back (Moscow maybe?) with 40 trailers full of equipment including cannons and a super-giant, inflatable, Devil Angus. The other performers, all well established in their own right, were in awe.