Tell Me :
Talk
Rubbish. Many drugs have the opposite effect on sex drive. And no drug can "breed creativity" if you aren't already creative. At most, some drugs can allow you to look at things differently, and some can relax you and help ease you into a state of mind where perhaps your performance might be better, but they certainly don't make you more creative or a better player.
seriously. i mean it's practically a requirement...it's more or less spelled out in the name of the band, even.
all the great jazzmen were totally drugged out...it was in their contracts.
Coltrane kicked heroin/drink around '57 - I'd say his most creative music came after that.
You didn't consider the drugs that affect perception and thought process; only stimulants/depressants.
you'd think the record companies by now would get the message and require their artists to imbibe appropriate amounts before rolling tape. i just don't understand.
the only way we're going to settle this debate is with a formal, scientific study. i see it going like this:
we take an artist. we send him into the recording studio (this is the "control" part of the experiment. we give him, say 3 hours to come up with something creative.
the next day we take the same artist and we drug him up bigtime. so high that we have to pull him down from the ceiling, after which we lead him into the same studio and give him 3 hours (it will seem like 3 years, but that's ok) to come up something creative
we then have an executive subcommittee, expert on all things creative, compare and contrast the results.
While i agree, it is very unfair to the sucky non-druggy artists ... There should be testing, like w/ steroids in baseball, and if an artist is found to be drugged up, or any evidence of drug use leading to enhanced songs/performance in the past, they should be stricken from the records and those albums should be deleted/burned/recalled/etc. To get started on this, I just trashed my Exile, Beggar's, etc.
i think you have this bass-akward....
just trying to level the playing field...
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Are musicians better performers and or more creative when stoned?
Posted by:
The Sicilian
()
Date: October 20, 2011 04:47
I recently heard a radio DJ comment about this refering to Scott Weiland of STP. Was he a better performer strung out on smack or straight? He thinks the former easily.
What about Keith? Or even Mick in the 1970's and coke?
How about Keith Moon on booze? Or John Bonham?
Was Eric Clapton a better guitar player while wasted?
What about the 60's musicians tripping on acid, Hendrix, Morrison, Jerry Garcia?
It's a long list.
What about Keith? Or even Mick in the 1970's and coke?
How about Keith Moon on booze? Or John Bonham?
Was Eric Clapton a better guitar player while wasted?
What about the 60's musicians tripping on acid, Hendrix, Morrison, Jerry Garcia?
It's a long list.
Re: Are musicians better performers and or more creative when stoned?
Posted by:
palerider22
()
Date: October 20, 2011 04:56
A lot of people won't want to hear it....but the truth is they would have been better musicians and performers without the drugs. The drugs did not enhance their talent...it diminished it.
Re: Are musicians better performers and or more creative when stoned?
Posted by:
nobs
()
Date: October 20, 2011 04:57
simply put, yes, drugs enhanced a youthful sex drive that breeds creativity!
Re: Are musicians better performers and or more creative when stoned?
Posted by:
whitem8
()
Date: October 20, 2011 05:15
Not better performers...but definitely enhances the creative process of writing and unleashing the imagination.
Re: Are musicians better performers and or more creative when stoned?
Posted by:
palerider22
()
Date: October 20, 2011 05:20
Agree..my point was strictly on musicianship & performing live...
Re: Are musicians better performers and or more creative when stoned?
Posted by:
24FPS
()
Date: October 20, 2011 07:04
I saw Eric Clapton from 8th row seats in 1978. He was purported to be struggling with substances. He was magnificent, playing incredible blues. (On a side note, Muddy Waters was the opening act). He looked tortured. He did this improvisation on White Room that blew my mind.
In 1994 I sat about 20 feet from Eric Clapton where he played the 600 seat House of Blues in L.A. It was my birthday. Eric had recently released some kind of blues album and he was still close to that acoustic Layla/Tears in Heaven album. He had been clean for a while. He played every note with technical perfection, and absolutely no soul at all.
I don't know what that proves.
In 1994 I sat about 20 feet from Eric Clapton where he played the 600 seat House of Blues in L.A. It was my birthday. Eric had recently released some kind of blues album and he was still close to that acoustic Layla/Tears in Heaven album. He had been clean for a while. He played every note with technical perfection, and absolutely no soul at all.
I don't know what that proves.
Re: Are musicians better performers and or more creative when stoned?
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: October 20, 2011 07:24
Quote
nobs
simply put, yes, drugs enhanced a youthful sex drive that breeds creativity!
Rubbish. Many drugs have the opposite effect on sex drive. And no drug can "breed creativity" if you aren't already creative. At most, some drugs can allow you to look at things differently, and some can relax you and help ease you into a state of mind where perhaps your performance might be better, but they certainly don't make you more creative or a better player.
Re: Are musicians better performers and or more creative when stoned?
Posted by:
Rockman
()
Date: October 20, 2011 07:45
.some performers should be stoned ....
ROCKMAN
ROCKMAN
Re: Are musicians better performers and or more creative when stoned?
Posted by:
Come On
()
Date: October 20, 2011 08:15
I don't know what that proves.
Just that EC was older....
2 1 2 0
Just that EC was older....
2 1 2 0
Re: Are musicians better performers and or more creative when stoned?
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: October 20, 2011 13:47
i won't listen to undrugged music; but, i'm a purest.
Re: Are musicians better performers and or more creative when stoned?
Posted by:
Spud
()
Date: October 20, 2011 14:00
Depends on the individual I think... and on how stoned they are !
Re: Are musicians better performers and or more creative when stoned?
Posted by:
Come On
()
Date: October 20, 2011 14:15
..my personal role model is Johnny Thunders ...
2 1 2 0
2 1 2 0
Re: Are musicians better performers and or more creative when stoned?
Posted by:
Bostonstranglerno9
()
Date: October 20, 2011 14:54
without doubt. Theyre more crative when stoned or skyhigh. The girls that i usually f u c k says im ten times better when im stoned. Frank Zappa was not a drug user though but imagine him on drugs. ill guess that would have been something. The best music is made by bands on drugs. Get the stones back on drugs and something will happen. A chemical reaction
Re: Are musicians better performers and or more creative when stoned?
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: October 20, 2011 17:07
Quote
Bostonstranglerno9
Get the stones back on drugs
seriously. i mean it's practically a requirement...it's more or less spelled out in the name of the band, even.
Re: Are musicians better performers and or more creative when stoned?
Posted by:
Hotstuff
()
Date: October 20, 2011 20:07
hey folks, mr coltrane was into heroin the most part of his creative face, and his music ...
Re: Are musicians better performers and or more creative when stoned?
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: October 20, 2011 20:10
Quote
Hotstuff
hey folks, mr coltrane was into heroin the most part of his creative face, and his music ...
all the great jazzmen were totally drugged out...it was in their contracts.
Re: Are musicians better performers and or more creative when stoned?
Posted by:
Sipuncula
()
Date: October 20, 2011 20:31
Definitely depends on the drug and the person. IMHO, heroin may have helped Keith feel out an idea in the studio in the Exile era for hours on end without him getting bored until it gelled into a Stones riff. The coked-out excitement of '78-'81 was well evident in Jagger's persona. Booze, well, probably makes it easier to get on stage or deal with boredom no matter who you are. The ability of psychedelic and cannabinoid drugs to enhance the perception of music and just about everything else are well known.
So, yeah, every drug has its use.
Many people find it hard to be responsible with power tools like that.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-10-20 20:34 by Sipuncula.
So, yeah, every drug has its use.
Many people find it hard to be responsible with power tools like that.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-10-20 20:34 by Sipuncula.
Re: Are musicians better performers and or more creative when stoned?
Posted by:
mr_dja
()
Date: October 20, 2011 20:39
Better Performers -> Mostly NOT. While a drug may help to calm nerves or relieve stage fright, they all impede manual dexterity, brain function, heart function, etc. all of which are needed to perform. I'll leave a slight door open for a drug which helps someone w/ a condition similar to ADD to be able to focus more clearly on one task. I think the original poster wasn't talking about LEGAL drugs though. Technically, the aspirin which helps relieve a performer's headache would be helping make the musician a better performer. Still, I don't think that's what the original poster had in mind.
More Creative -> Overall I'm going to agree with 71Tele on this one... The creativity has got to be there to start with. Where I will leave some room for experimentation/debate is in the fact that certain drugs may lower a person's inhibitions or self-doubt allowing them to take chances and try things that they might not have tried sober. Not sure if that really is making them more creative though. Also, though some drugs will allow a performer to stay awake longer and thus have more artistic output, I don't think that this would fall under the heading of "more creative" either.
Peace,
Mr DJA
More Creative -> Overall I'm going to agree with 71Tele on this one... The creativity has got to be there to start with. Where I will leave some room for experimentation/debate is in the fact that certain drugs may lower a person's inhibitions or self-doubt allowing them to take chances and try things that they might not have tried sober. Not sure if that really is making them more creative though. Also, though some drugs will allow a performer to stay awake longer and thus have more artistic output, I don't think that this would fall under the heading of "more creative" either.
Peace,
Mr DJA
Re: Are musicians better performers and or more creative when stoned?
Posted by:
gomp
()
Date: October 20, 2011 20:40
Quote
Hotstuff
hey folks, mr coltrane was into heroin the most part of his creative face, and his music ...
Coltrane kicked heroin/drink around '57 - I'd say his most creative music came after that.
Re: Are musicians better performers and or more creative when stoned?
Posted by:
Sipuncula
()
Date: October 20, 2011 21:07
Quote
mr_dja
Better Performers -> Mostly NOT. While a drug may help to calm nerves or relieve stage fright, they all impede manual dexterity, brain function, heart function, etc. all of which are needed to perform. I'll leave a slight door open for a drug which helps someone w/ a condition similar to ADD to be able to focus more clearly on one task. I think the original poster wasn't talking about LEGAL drugs though. Technically, the aspirin which helps relieve a performer's headache would be helping make the musician a better performer. Still, I don't think that's what the original poster had in mind.
More Creative -> Overall I'm going to agree with 71Tele on this one... The creativity has got to be there to start with. Where I will leave some room for experimentation/debate is in the fact that certain drugs may lower a person's inhibitions or self-doubt allowing them to take chances and try things that they might not have tried sober. Not sure if that really is making them more creative though. Also, though some drugs will allow a performer to stay awake longer and thus have more artistic output, I don't think that this would fall under the heading of "more creative" either.
Peace,
Mr DJA
You didn't consider the drugs that affect perception and thought process; only stimulants/depressants.
Re: Are musicians better performers and or more creative when stoned?
Posted by:
M4000D
()
Date: October 20, 2011 21:11
Smoking pot made me very creative
My mind would just churn out lyrics and melodies
When I quit I lost a lot of creative energy.
I could play all night high on weed and had no probs.
I could not drink a single beer and perform
I became very sloppy.
Of course it's different for everyone
I knew pot heads who could not even hold their instrument when
Stoned.
My mind would just churn out lyrics and melodies
When I quit I lost a lot of creative energy.
I could play all night high on weed and had no probs.
I could not drink a single beer and perform
I became very sloppy.
Of course it's different for everyone
I knew pot heads who could not even hold their instrument when
Stoned.
Re: Are musicians better performers and or more creative when stoned?
Posted by:
LeonidP
()
Date: October 20, 2011 21:19
The stats say it all. All performers that I know of, whether Stones, Beatles, Aerosmith, Hendrix ... all had their best musical output when at the height of their drug use. And typically they go to shite after going sober, Aerosmith as the prime example.
Re: Are musicians better performers and or more creative when stoned?
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: October 20, 2011 21:25
Quote
LeonidP
The stats say it all. All performers that I know of, whether Stones, Beatles, Aerosmith, Hendrix ... all had their best musical output when at the height of their drug use. And typically they go to shite after going sober, Aerosmith as the prime example.
you'd think the record companies by now would get the message and require their artists to imbibe appropriate amounts before rolling tape. i just don't understand.
Re: Are musicians better performers and or more creative when stoned?
Posted by:
jamesfdouglas
()
Date: October 20, 2011 21:37
If you're not a professional musician, not a creative person, and have never tried drugs, you are completely unqualified to answer this question.
My answer, hands down, is a resounding YES.
Nothing anyone says who is neither musician nor drug taker will change my mind.
[thepowergoats.com]
My answer, hands down, is a resounding YES.
Nothing anyone says who is neither musician nor drug taker will change my mind.
[thepowergoats.com]
Re: Are musicians better performers and or more creative when stoned?
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: October 20, 2011 21:42
Quote
mr_dja
Better Performers -> Mostly NOT. While a drug may help to calm nerves or relieve stage fright, they all impede manual dexterity, brain function, heart function, etc. all of which are needed to perform. I'll leave a slight door open for a drug which helps someone w/ a condition similar to ADD to be able to focus more clearly on one task. I think the original poster wasn't talking about LEGAL drugs though. Technically, the aspirin which helps relieve a performer's headache would be helping make the musician a better performer. Still, I don't think that's what the original poster had in mind.
More Creative -> Overall I'm going to agree with 71Tele on this one... The creativity has got to be there to start with. Where I will leave some room for experimentation/debate is in the fact that certain drugs may lower a person's inhibitions or self-doubt allowing them to take chances and try things that they might not have tried sober. Not sure if that really is making them more creative though. Also, though some drugs will allow a performer to stay awake longer and thus have more artistic output, I don't think that this would fall under the heading of "more creative" either.
Peace,
Mr DJA
the only way we're going to settle this debate is with a formal, scientific study. i see it going like this:
we take an artist. we send him into the recording studio (this is the "control" part of the experiment. we give him, say 3 hours to come up with something creative.
the next day we take the same artist and we drug him up bigtime. so high that we have to pull him down from the ceiling, after which we lead him into the same studio and give him 3 hours (it will seem like 3 years, but that's ok) to come up something creative
we then have an executive subcommittee, expert on all things creative, compare and contrast the results.
Re: Are musicians better performers and or more creative when stoned?
Posted by:
Anonymous User
()
Date: October 20, 2011 21:45
Depends on their goal and the people they work with really. Many players got away with it. Larry (on the left) got replaced by di Meola cause of substance abuse:
Re: Are musicians better performers and or more creative when stoned?
Posted by:
LeonidP
()
Date: October 20, 2011 21:47
Quote
StonesTodQuote
LeonidP
The stats say it all. All performers that I know of, whether Stones, Beatles, Aerosmith, Hendrix ... all had their best musical output when at the height of their drug use. And typically they go to shite after going sober, Aerosmith as the prime example.
you'd think the record companies by now would get the message and require their artists to imbibe appropriate amounts before rolling tape. i just don't understand.
While i agree, it is very unfair to the sucky non-druggy artists ... There should be testing, like w/ steroids in baseball, and if an artist is found to be drugged up, or any evidence of drug use leading to enhanced songs/performance in the past, they should be stricken from the records and those albums should be deleted/burned/recalled/etc. To get started on this, I just trashed my Exile, Beggar's, etc.
Re: Are musicians better performers and or more creative when stoned?
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: October 20, 2011 21:49
Quote
LeonidPQuote
StonesTodQuote
LeonidP
The stats say it all. All performers that I know of, whether Stones, Beatles, Aerosmith, Hendrix ... all had their best musical output when at the height of their drug use. And typically they go to shite after going sober, Aerosmith as the prime example.
you'd think the record companies by now would get the message and require their artists to imbibe appropriate amounts before rolling tape. i just don't understand.
While i agree, it is very unfair to the sucky non-druggy artists ... There should be testing, like w/ steroids in baseball, and if an artist is found to be drugged up, or any evidence of drug use leading to enhanced songs/performance in the past, they should be stricken from the records and those albums should be deleted/burned/recalled/etc. To get started on this, I just trashed my Exile, Beggar's, etc.
i think you have this bass-akward....
Re: Are musicians better performers and or more creative when stoned?
Posted by:
LeonidP
()
Date: October 20, 2011 21:51
Quote
StonesTodQuote
LeonidPQuote
StonesTodQuote
LeonidP
The stats say it all. All performers that I know of, whether Stones, Beatles, Aerosmith, Hendrix ... all had their best musical output when at the height of their drug use. And typically they go to shite after going sober, Aerosmith as the prime example.
you'd think the record companies by now would get the message and require their artists to imbibe appropriate amounts before rolling tape. i just don't understand.
While i agree, it is very unfair to the sucky non-druggy artists ... There should be testing, like w/ steroids in baseball, and if an artist is found to be drugged up, or any evidence of drug use leading to enhanced songs/performance in the past, they should be stricken from the records and those albums should be deleted/burned/recalled/etc. To get started on this, I just trashed my Exile, Beggar's, etc.
i think you have this bass-akward....
just trying to level the playing field...
Re: Are musicians better performers and or more creative when stoned?
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: October 20, 2011 21:58
Quote
LeonidPQuote
StonesTodQuote
LeonidPQuote
StonesTodQuote
LeonidP
The stats say it all. All performers that I know of, whether Stones, Beatles, Aerosmith, Hendrix ... all had their best musical output when at the height of their drug use. And typically they go to shite after going sober, Aerosmith as the prime example.
you'd think the record companies by now would get the message and require their artists to imbibe appropriate amounts before rolling tape. i just don't understand.
it will never seem level with the proper drug usage, though
While i agree, it is very unfair to the sucky non-druggy artists ... There should be testing, like w/ steroids in baseball, and if an artist is found to be drugged up, or any evidence of drug use leading to enhanced songs/performance in the past, they should be stricken from the records and those albums should be deleted/burned/recalled/etc. To get started on this, I just trashed my Exile, Beggar's, etc.
i think you have this bass-akward....
just trying to level the playing field...
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
Bashlets , Britney , bv , ChrisL , cwalters , Doxa , goingmad , hockenheim95 , hot stuff , makustone , Martin90 , MisterDDDD , More Hot Rocks , rastakeith , rogerriffin , RollingFreak , SimonN , snarf2014 , snorton , stonemac , swaff , TheBluesHadaBaby , Topi , waterrats , Wolfgang
Guests:
1658
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10