I feel similarly, although Asimov/Bradbury/Clark never really did it for me as compared to Aldiss/Ballard/? (I'm drawing a blank for the C's; perhaps we move on to Dick?).
Many of the suggestions down-thread don't really do it for me, either. There's something about that 70s-era stuff. I can't help but feel that the original wave had more original non-genre influences and feel fresher. There was also a more reasonable approach to page count and padding (although I suppose Aldiss eventually wrote Helliconia) and mercifully few "look, this is a story that ping-pongs between 18 different viewpoints" structures.
As a side note, I also could go my whole life without having to read increasingly edgy stuff where it's revealed that the real purpose of science fiction is to dream up gross new torture scenes, etc.
Upvoting your comment. I hope you won't minding me suggest you update the first line to read Clarke rather than Clark. Perhaps I'm tired, but it took me a minute to figure out who you meant.
Many of the suggestions down-thread don't really do it for me, either. There's something about that 70s-era stuff. I can't help but feel that the original wave had more original non-genre influences and feel fresher. There was also a more reasonable approach to page count and padding (although I suppose Aldiss eventually wrote Helliconia) and mercifully few "look, this is a story that ping-pongs between 18 different viewpoints" structures.
As a side note, I also could go my whole life without having to read increasingly edgy stuff where it's revealed that the real purpose of science fiction is to dream up gross new torture scenes, etc.