Rock Music: 1951-1976 vs. 1977-2003

I think I understand the issue being discussed, but isn't this similar to: which came first, the chicken or the egg? If Muddy Waters and Howlin' Wolf hadn't done what they did, would the Beatles and Rolling Stones ever done what they did?
For the most part I think the phrase ' dwarves on the shoulders of giants' sums up the music world. How far back does one have to go to find the line between the dwarves and giants???
That said, there have been great musicians in every era, and to ask us to draw a line is a difficult and personal thing.
Comments were made about Jethro Tull for instance. I prefer some of their later work to their earliest work, but if it weren't for the early stuff the later stuff would never have been made!
I grew up in the 70's so it is all the more difficult for me to draw the line. The Doors work done in the early 70's I liked. The Jethro Tull and Bob Dylan of the mid to late 70's I prefered to the earlier work.
What came first, This Was or Crest of the Knave; Free wheelin' or Blood on the Tracks???
I personally prefer good music to era specific music!

Unclejeff, you're saying that the mid 70's were an interlude in good quality R&R? How can one really argue/debate this?

Jethro Tull (which started recording in '67, but was around much earlier) put out some of their best LPs in the 75-79 years.

It does seem as though R&R did lose its way in there though. At the time when everyone roundly criticised the 'arena' rock bands who no longer played clubs, now this is looked upon as the golden age of concert attendance. This might be due to the fact that many of the groups are no longer around.

I'm going to see Jethro Tull again for the umpteenth time in August, but it's about the show now, not so much about the quality of the music.

We're probably around the same age, just have different perspectives.

Sean, for the most part I couldn't warm up to the 'punk' scene. A lot of attitude, but not much talent! I still like The Clash though!

It seems somewhat silly to be rebelling against the music that allowed you to exist. I understand that it was mostly a political/economic thing, but to castigate other bands for having talent when the punk practiconers had none is self defeating.

This is all opinion anyway, so we're all right! You gotta love a thread whree people disagree and are still right.