I would probably say about 1949-1950 (when my dad was born)...You'd be a teen (15) when Beatlemania struck, 20 at Woodstock, yet not too old for Disco (27 in '75), so be at the ideal 'age' to experience each new cultural experience. Still, don't know if I actually would want to have been born then, and be nearly 60 now...but I wouldn't mind going back in a time machine and living through those years without ageing at all, tho!

I would probably say about 1949-1950 (when my dad was born)...You'd be a teen (15) when Beatlemania struck, 20 at Woodstock, yet not too old for Disco (27 in '75), so be at the ideal 'age' to experience each new cultural experience. Still, don't know if I actually would want to have been born then, and be nearly 60 now...but I wouldn't mind going back in a time machine and living through those years without ageing at all, tho!



I agree. My parents were both born in 1948, and they tell me of all of the neat stuff they encountered throughout the decades. That would be pretty much perfect.

I agree. My parents were both born in 1948, and they tell me of all of the neat stuff they encountered throughout the decades. That would be pretty much perfect.


Although you'd kick yourself even more if you were born in 49, but never really 'sampled' the music.etc of the era. Like you never watched a Doors concert, but knew you COULD HAVE. I just couldn't live with that!

Quote from: Trimac20 on Today at 10:02:23 AM
I would probably say about 1949-1950 (when my dad was born)...You'd be a teen (15) when Beatlemania struck, 20 at Woodstock, yet not too old for Disco (27 in '75), so be at the ideal 'age' to experience each new cultural experience. Still, don't know if I actually would want to have been born then, and be nearly 60 now...but I wouldn't mind going back in a time machine and living through those years without ageing at all, tho!


I agree. My parents were both born in 1948, and they tell me of all of the neat stuff they encountered throughout the decades. That would be pretty much perfect.


Dagnabit! I just missed out! I want my money back! ....  :D


I planned to see both Greenday and Oasis bout a year back, but unforseen circumstances sort of prevented me from going. I'm really kicking myself over that, tho  >:(

I'm of the opinion that I'm a 1970er at heart :)

I planned to see both Greenday and Oasis bout a year back, but unforseen circumstances sort of prevented me from going. I'm really kicking myself over that, tho  >:(


You already missed their heyday...so you shouldn't worry about it!

I wish I was born around 1940-1945....I would have loved to see television as it was in the 50's, especially if I could have been lucky enough to attend one of the showings RCA set up in different cities to introduce Americans to color television by having a CT-100 set up for people to watch the first live, coast-to-coast color broadcast of the Pasadena Rose Parade...

and in the 60's I'd be old enough to join in an anti-Vietnam War protest.

You already missed their heyday...so you shouldn't worry about it!


Still, they're the only superbands really worth seeing...

I'm of the opinion that I'm a 1970er at heart :)


Yeah, I think I'm sort of a 1972er or 1973er. Like I'm old enough to remember all of the '80s very well and I'm still old enough to get into the first half of the '90s, and like '70s stuff.

Yeah, I think I'm sort of a 1972er or 1973er. Like I'm old enough to remember all of the '80s very well and I'm still old enough to get into the first half of the '90s, and like '70s stuff.


You'd be too young to appreciate the Disco/New Wave movement, tho, not to mention the early 70s. Though you'd be a late 80s teen, which could be interesting.

1949.  That's the year both my parents were born.  They remember watching the Beatles on Ed Sullivan, the moon landing on TV and they even went to discos before they had us kids. 

I wish I was born around 1940-1945....I would have loved to see television as it was in the 50's, especially if I could have been lucky enough to attend one of the showings RCA set up in different cities to introduce Americans to color television by having a CT-100 set up for people to watch the first live, coast-to-coast color broadcast of the Pasadena Rose Parade...

and in the 60's I'd be old enough to join in an anti-Vietnam War protest.



A lot of my parents' friends were active in the anti-war movement.

1949.  That's the year both my parents were born.  They remember watching the Beatles on Ed Sullivan, the moon landing on TV and they even went to discos before they had us kids. 


Ever notice how the Baby Boomers, in general, tended to have kids a little later in life than other generations, almost the same as Gen X (or possibly even older)?

1949-50 is not that great...you'd also be the perfect age to end up in Vietnam :-[

1949-50 is not that great...you'd also be the perfect age to end up in Vietnam :-[


If I was drafted I sure as hell wouldn't go...

You'd be too young to appreciate the Disco/New Wave movement, tho, not to mention the early 70s. Though you'd be a late 80s teen, which could be interesting.


However, it's not like people can't get into things later.

However, it's not like people can't get into things later.


But the whole atmosphere wouldn't be there...i.e. there wouldn't be New Wave clubs everywhere, people wouldn't be living the lifestyles, wearing the fashions.etc

1969 or 1970.

I picked the range that has my birth year ('59).  It was a good time.  Got to absorb the civil rights and anti-war messages of the 60s, as well as the "peace, love and sunshine" psychedelics of that decade.  Began adolescence in the early 70s -- hippies and some good folk-rock & singer/songwriters of the early 70s.  Disco, Big-Hair metal and Southern Rock of the later 70s....young adulthood in the early 80s -- new wave & punk...and into real live responsibilities later in the 80s, which was fine by me.  It was a good time to grow up.  But perhaps everyone feels that way.

Of course it depends on what you're nostalgic about (i.e. some people like me, more nostalgize on their childhood stuff, others their teens, college life, 20s or even 30s), or for which era.

Overall, I agree the late '40s (1949ers definitely) are a good mix. Sure, they'd be kids in the ' 50s, but they could recall alot of it, have really experienced the British Invasion, Vietnam in the '60s, and been young enough for the '70s Disco life and perhaps even some '80s too. 1943-53ers in general could share this rough "baby boomer" experience.

1963-82 probably had the most "social/political/world" changes (esp. 1963-71 or so).

Ever notice how the Baby Boomers, in general, tended to have kids a little later in life than other generations, almost the same as Gen X (or possibly even older)?



My parents were married in '72 and didn't have me until '82.  Sometimes they joke they wished they didn't wait so long, because if they still had my sister and I the same time span apart, but earlier, say.....1975, I'd be going on 31 and my sister would be going on 26. 

1935.  I'd have missed the Depression for the most part, I'd miss WWII, Korea, and Vietnam(I'd be a bit old to be drafted).  I would have been young enough to get in on the fun aspects of the 50s, and hell I could have been a bit more open-minded and even got in on the 60s to a degree. (hey- a lot of the Hippie leaders were born in the 30s).  The main thing is I would have came of age before what I'd call the "chickensh!t era" rolled in.  Thats when things started becoming more regulated, "the system" became more pervasive.

For example, my dad and uncle grew up moving around constantly in the 50s and 60s.  Their father, my grandfather(whom I'm named after- I'm the third), was a salesman.  For the most part they moved every 2 or 3 months, sometimes within 3 or 4 weeks if the old man decided he didn't like the place.  And most summers they lived out of motels.  Nowadays though, that really would not be possible.  There is so much red tape now in everything from moving in to a place to rent to getting your electricity turned on as compared to then.  Half the time the utilities weren't even on in my grandfather's real name.  He gave them a name and they just accepted it.  Now they would want all sorts of proof as to who he is.  If he were alive today it'd drive him nuts.