Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Music Appreciation

Tomconroy

(7,611 posts) Thu Oct 21, 2021, 02:57 AM Oct 2021

Because - The Dave Clark Five

4 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Because - The Dave Clark Five (Original Post) Tomconroy Oct 2021 OP

beautiful song Skittles Oct 2021 #1

1964 Roy Rolling Oct 2021 #2

Yeah, it was pretty funny back in the day. lark Oct 2021 #4

Wow. The Dave Clark Five knocking it out of the ballpark Tomconroy Oct 2021 #3

Skittles

(153,138 posts)

1. beautiful song

Reply to Tomconroy (Original post)

Thu Oct 21, 2021, 03:33 AM

Oct 2021

Roy Rolling

(6,911 posts)

2. 1964

Reply to Tomconroy (Original post)

Thu Oct 21, 2021, 05:06 AM

Oct 2021

There was a big marketing push by recording executives to brand the Dave Clark Five as the next Beatles, replacing them as the next fad in pop music the same way they pushed Fabian as an Elvis alternative.

I believe they misjudged the impact of the Beatles. 😜

lark

(23,078 posts)

4. Yeah, it was pretty funny back in the day.

Reply to Roy Rolling (Reply #2)

Thu Oct 21, 2021, 10:10 AM

Oct 2021

Dave Clark 5 were a great white bread band, very pretty music, nothing at all edgy about them. The Beatles were a totally different phenomenon, they weren't so perfect, had some hard edges & played some "black" music - revolutionary for us tween/teen girls. Dave Clark 5 were the right side of the brain, Beatles were the left & the pumping heart.

Tomconroy

(7,611 posts)

3. Wow. The Dave Clark Five knocking it out of the ballpark

Reply to Tomconroy (Original post)

Thu Oct 21, 2021, 07:27 AM

Oct 2021

this morning, with all the views and recommends.

Reply to this discussion