Crazy Horse vs The Spiders From Mars!
As we progress through the Semifinals round of our tournament to determine—once and for all—rock’s greatest backing band ever, the Classic Conference comes down to a battle between Crazy Horse and The Spiders From Mars. The winner of this match will face the upcoming Rebel Conference champs.
Through the long, painstaking course of this tournament adequate arguments have been made on behalf of all the semifinalists. That doesn’t mean you’re not encouraged to continue arguing for your selection in this round, but you are welcome to cast your vote now. Voting in this match will run through 11:59 pm on Thursday, February February 23, 2012.
Semifinals, Classic Conference: Crazy Horse vs The Spiders From Mars.
- Crazy Horse (55%, 28 Votes)
- The Spiders From Mars (45%, 23 Votes)
Total Voters: 51
Loading ...
Deep down I tend to prefer the records of Neil Young and Crazy Horse more than the records of David Bowie.
Deep down I tend to prefer the arrangements of David Bowie records to the arrangements of Neil Young and Crazy Horse records.
I’m not thrilled by the overall playing of either backing band.
That said, because Crazy Horse successfully backs up a musician who I suspect gives very little in the way of clear conceptual direction and must only follow their leader’s highly personal, highly simple style, I somehow gave them the nod over the Spiders From Mars, who probably added more to Bowie’s sound but whose input would have been covered without their presence, as Bowie would have been able to direct almost any similar set of musicians to play in a similar manner. Somehow I would imagine that any other group of mediocre musicians like Crazy Horse wouldn’t be able to deliver for Young in his rocking style of music. There’s a natural fit between Young and Crazy Horse that makes Crazy Horse seem more valuable than they otherwise might seem to be.
With you all the way there Mr M, with the added bonus of CH existing as a unit for over forty years and the Spiders for only about three.
Plus, CH existed before NY, and exist while he’s elsewhere.
It would be difficult to argue that they do much more than provide sonic sludge for NY to riff against, but they do the job they’re being asked to do as effectively as any of the other great bands who have risen towards the top of this contest. Nobody else sounds like them backing NY, just as nobody else could have sounded like the Family Stone, or the Wailers. The issue I have with the JBs is that others could have done the job, and that’s an issue I also have with the Spiders.
This is not an argument that CH are virtuoso musicians, that would be silly, but of the two they are the band who tick all of the boxes for me.
Another tough one.
The Mod raises some good points about the Horse. They are a band I always tend to underrate, but there is definitely some alchemy going on there, which I think, is the underlying attraction for Neil. Get a much of middling musicians completely baked, and then turn on the tape machine to see if you can capture anything interesting. Part of the Replacements’ appeal for me was that they seemed like ordinary people doing frequently extraordinary things. Sure it’s interesting to see a skilled professional tightrope walker go back and forth on the high wire, but what if they just grabbed somebody from the audience and got a six pack in them before they sent him out on the tightrope. Potentially much more thrilling. I find the Horse appealing in a similar manner.
On the other hand, I’ll bet the Spiders were drilled almost as much as those guys in the JBs. I suspect that nothing was left to chance. But more than anyone in either band, I think that Mick Ronson took his boss’ vision and not just supported it, but actually propelled it forward. And that’s why I’m voting for the Spiders. [NOTE: This means the smart money is on the Horse because I’ve voted for the loser almost every time on this bracket.]
Is it true that no one has bothered to post a Spiders’ clip? OK:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sz0XIiIlATE
Also, Bowie and Ronson had a “bond” that I would NOT like to see with Neil and Pancho. https://encrypted-tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRpmdl8MjDMaTFJ-iqhgUrlFezXSuxKJDbeQB8s6K-3FAtq5CfA-c-Z6ayNFg
All that and I still might vote for Crazy Horse.
First off, I will reaffirm my belief that the Spiders is a fictional band and therefore should be disqualified.
But musically, I think Crazy Horse knew when to get out of the way of Neil and his awesome guitar soloing. It takes a great band to show that kind of restraint at the feet of its leader. And isn’t that what this whole thing is about? I think the Spiders actually outshown (outshined?) Bowie at times.
Oh, and when Neil went through his crazy super-stoner/dpressed phase, they propped him up. Even Nils (during this short period) knew who played the solos.
I love a lot of Bowie songs. But I really, really love a a number Neil Young albums. Win goes to Crazy Horse.
Man, Crazy Horse sure has been getting a ton of mileage out of “They just had something…or didn’t have something…or sounded like…something? And got out of Neil’s way!” in this thing.
Spiders deserve this, and as cdm says above, it starts with Ronson, who didn’t have to get out of Bowie’s way, Bowie was perfectly comfortable throwing him the spotlight. Just go back and listen to that guy play on …Ziggy Stardust. Listen to that little solo he does right before the horn flourish at the end of the album. Or the riffs on Starman, Cracked Actor and Jean Genie.
And for the rest of the band, listen to the groove they get into on Hang On To Yourself and Moonage Daydream, and the transition when Ziggy ends and Suffragette City starts. They also provide key backing vocals all over the Ziggy album, matching Bowie’s tone and did it live and in ridiculous costumes as well.
I’d also seek out the Bowie/Spiders covers of White Light/White Heat (which features one of those “Ronno!” moments when Bowie happily gives Ronson the spotlight) and Waiting For The Man for more evidence of how great their sound was.
And finally, Mick Woodmansey: most underrated name in the history of rock?
magic, I know what you’re saying. This ass-whoopin’ due Crazy Horse, should they move forward, serves all those who voted for Crazy Horse over Rock ‘n Roll Iwo Jima personified right.
I have to vote for the Spiders. While Crazy Horse supported Young well enough, he seemed pretty much content just to let them run with a song. Bowie was more of a control freak and he required his band to handle wildly diverse styles ranging from bouncy pop, prog, raw blues, torch ballads, metal, and just about everything in between. Plus, as others have said, Mick Ronson ably played a big role in shaping the Spiders’ sound.
I’ve thought long and hard about this one. I think they’re the best “Rock” bands left in the whole game. I’m going with The Spiders. Mostly because just Neil Young doesn’t sound much different with or without Crazy Horse. I have to agree with everything said about Mick Ronson. He was something else.
Mod, have you considered the fact that 19 of your Bowie Top 40 – including 14 of the infamous “29 Great Bowie Songs” and 15 of the Top 30 – were done with The Spiders From Mars? Is that really a less vital and enduring contribution than the “I dunno…they didn’t clash with Neil’s plaid or somethin’?” Rock Stupor-powers of Crazy Horse? I think you need to think this through some more.
You make great points. I thought long and hard about this, even losing sleep over my decision on Tuesday night. Here’s the thing, though: I feel most of those 19 Bowie songs could have been done as well with, I don’t know, Alice Cooper’s band or even Badfinger. Those songs are really well written. The arrangements are sterling. I’m sure the band put a lot into the success of those songs, but I don’t find songs from the Spiders-era Bowie catalog that are great in spite of mediocre songwriting. Go a few years into Bowie’s future, for instance, and there are more songs that I feel work in spite of sketchy songwriting, stuff like my beloved “TVC15” and “Heroes.” Have you ever enjoyed a straightforward version of “Heroes” that doesn’t have all those druggy, shimmering noises from Fripp and company? I have not. Those versions are nowhere near as good. A half-decent high school garage band, however, can play “Ziggy Stardust” and get you juiced up.
There’s a band coming up in the conference that constantly saved their leader from sketchy songwriting. (You may be able to guess who I have in mind.) That band’s bassist alone accounts for 2 cool songs per album. Mick Ronson’s playing is awesome on those old records – and the other guys are no slouches, but I probably punish them a bit because they were serving the song’s parts. Now that I think of it there is one half-baked Bowie song that’s saved by Ronson’s playing: “Sweet Head.” That little hammer-on roll he does between verse vocal lines is the song’s raison d’etre.
There’s a lot wrong with Crazy Horse, starting with the fact that I think they all kind of suck on their instruments followed by the fact that they are a drag to look at in their Lee jeans, but I credit them with being essential to that rocking side of Neil Young. He could have made a lot of great rocking music with the CSN guys (and that drummer, Dallas someone) backing him on his solo albums, but they wouldn’t have had a clue how to support the raw framework of half-baked songs like “Powderfinger” and “Sedan Delivery.”
I think Mick Ronson did most of those arrangements, didn’t he?
A half-decent high school garage band might have handled “Ziggy Stardust” but what about “Moonage Daydream”, “Saviour Machine”, or “Life on Mars”? Crazy Horse had a few shticks that they did quite well, but they never seemed capable of the musical diversity of Ronson and the Spiders.
There’s a real Prodigal Son element to your argument as I understand it. It seems that you are basically punishing the Spiders for being better players. You are rewarding the Horse because they exceed the meager expectations that you have for them. That hardly seems reasonable.
I like Alice Cooper’s band a lot for Alice Cooper songs but they couldn’t step into the Spider’s platforms any easier than they could take the place of the Horse. Actually, I think that most bands would have an easier time coming up with a serviceable version of Like a Hurricane that they would Ziggy.
And as for Ronson’s playing. I will add you to the long list (on which my name formerly appeared), of people who have grossly underrated Ronson’s guitar playing. A short time ago, people on this list were slagging off Bowie’s version of Let’s Spend the Night Together. I used to hate this version, especially because I think the Stone’s version is pretty much perfect. But over the years, I’ve done a complete 180 on this song, almost solely due to Ronson’s guitar.
I won’t try to claim this is anywhere near the Sophie’s Choice that The JBs vs. The Family Stone was, but I want to make it clear that I’m not anti-Crazy Horse.
That said, in the interest of fairness and getting the truest results, I’ve been checking out some Crazy Horse footage to be sure I wasn’t on the wrong side of this, and I need someone to prove to me that this is The Best Backing Band of The Classic Rock Era in action and not an extended scene from the 1968 Night Of The Living Dead: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rWZbRK4SCg
What’s the opposite of Mach Schau?
Mach Blau?
Faux Shau?
What band on earth would think of covering something called “Saviour Machine?” I’ve never even heard of that song.
You can’t deny that almost any cover of a Neil Young and Crazy Horse song blows, whereas almost any cover of a Bowie and the Spiders song, even “Saviour Machine” I would think, is fun to hear because the tune and arrangements are so solid.
Please remove me from that list! I like Ronson’s playing a lot; it’s very tuneful and defined. I’m not slagging Ronson’s playing at all by backing the highly inferior (individual musician-wise, that is) Crazy Horse.
Schaugaze?
Drogen Schau?
What was that? “spoonful and what”?
Oh, “Tuneful and defined”! I was having trouble making out what you were saying because your praise for Ronson was so damned faint.
I can deny it, thanks to Bauhaus.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6a_YQXFs7Ts
By the way, why can’t I see the actual poll choices (Chrome in Win 7/64)? Is this a conspiracy by Mr. Mod to prevent people from voting for the Spiders?
A friendly (and possibly irrelevant) reminder of what trying to sound like Crazy Horse can sometimes produce.
https://www.rocktownhall.com/blogs/index.php/i-m-getting-blown-away/
Only 44 minutes left to choose!
What am I saying??? In 24 hours there will be 44 minutes left to choose.
I went with Crazy Horse. I guess I’d rather be a caveman than a spaceman. I guess in the end, Neil plays the guys in Crazy Horse like his old black guitar. Anyone can hammer out those open chords but only Neil & Crazy Horse sound like that. The long jams from Decade and I’ve dug since high school. Re ac tor was a “smoke ’em up” favorite all through college. And I still gravitate toward Rust and Zuma over the remainder of Neil’s work today.
I would have preferred the E Street Band in this bracket but I can’t be unhappy with the Horse.
Speaking of the E Street Band (and apologies if this was mentioned before) but a few weeks ago Miami Steve was on Howard Stern. Stern asked him why the E Street Band wasn’t in the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame. Miami professed ignorance but did very modestly say he thought they should be. Stern then asked him why Bruce didn’t refuse induction unless it was with the E Street Band and were there any hard feelings about that. Miami’s lack of response to Stern’s repeated questions about this spoke the proverbial volumes.
I don’t know if any backing bands are in the R&RHOF (and I’m too lazy to look). But if so, I wonder how it tracks with the bracket results here. Or is that grist for another thread – which of these bands deserve to be in the R&RHOF, either with their mainstay or on their own?
I think after this whole thing is over there should be a massive poll with all of the contestants to see who would win in a flat vote.
I bet Mod would receive a lot of offlist support for “65. Not The MGs”.
I went with Crazy Horse, just ‘cuz they seem like more of a band, and less like a figment of Bowie’s imagination. Plus, they rely on their star/leader more, I think.
I admit that’s half-assed — but I could see Crazy Horse performing an enthusiastic medley of classic rock hits in a neighborhood bar if they wanted/needed to — the Spiders from Mars seem like they’d vanish in a puff of smoke without Bowie.
Sorry, I meant to say that Crazy Horse relies on their leader *less* than the Spiders from Mars.
I’ve resigned myself to the fact that this one is over, but I still don’t get the “not a real band” logic – they were with him for multiple albums and toured. The gimmick and make-up were added on, but it’s not like The Gorillaz where it’s an actual fake band of rotating players who step into pre-made characters when drafted by the leader.
And the relied on the leader less thing doesn’t fly for me, either. Take out Neil and you’re taking out the frontman and lead player. Take out Bowie and you still have Ronson, who was treated as a clear second-in-command and is the lead guitar player/instrumental star/co-arranger, and Ronson also did work as a frontman with other members of the Spiders.
There’s not much time left, Townspeeps. Do not go gently into the night. Log onto a friend’s computer if you’ve voted already!
k pretty much states my position. I went with Crazy Horse. The Spiders were together such a short time, and their output is comparatively tiny.