A thought popped into my brain today that I thought I would share with you concerning the repeating of the classics. Is it possible that the Stones created songs that are beyond great? I mean, to my ears there are just so damn many great Stones songs that I love listening to. I could list at least 150 songs that I thoroughly enjoy. To my ears those 150 songs are all great. But it is more than obvious that the Stones have their "blockbusters" that go beyond great. These are the songs that the vast majority of concert goers want to hear, and would be disappointed if they were not played at every live concert. Maybe it is time for us to put these songs in a category above great? Maybe we even need to invent a word for them? I used blockbusters, but maybe there is a better word to describe them? Can anyone think of another band that has as many "blockbuster" songs as the Stones have? I mean, if the Beatles were still all alive and touring what 20 or so songs would they be playing from their peak years? And, would they have the same impact as the Stones blockbusters? Just a thought, but it appears the Stones have created songs that have grown bigger than the band itself. Any thoughts?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2013-09-06 04:08 by JumpinJackOLantern.

HOT ROCKS

Quote
HopeYouGuessMyName
HOT ROCKS

Yes, indeed, but do you think the Stones "Hot Rocks" have become bigger than the band itself?

Bigger than the band itself? No, that sort of thing, if it happens at all (which it doesn't), is reserved for people whose work sometimes seems to take on a life of its own. The Who's Tommy, for example, or Pink Floyd's The Dark Side Of The Moon.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2013-09-06 14:31 by tatters.

I don't know, sometimes I think the Stones have created "monsters" that exceed even themselves. If that isn't so then they should be able to tour on all new songs. That would be the "proof in the pudding" so to speak.

They have iconic songs that are everywhere movies, commercials, sporting events and classic rock radio. These songs could be bigger than the band. And there are so many of them.

Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
I don't know, sometimes I think the Stones have created "monsters" that exceed even themselves. If that isn't so then they should be able to tour on all new songs. That would be the "proof in the pudding" so to speak.

Haven't you said many times that you detest these "beyond great" monsters, and would prefer it if they would instead play Saint Of Me, and stuff like that?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-09-06 05:00 by tatters.

If I'd noticed this was Jack I would have stayed away!!!

Quote
tatters

Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
I don't know, sometimes I think the Stones have created "monsters" that exceed even themselves. If that isn't so then they should be able to tour on all new songs. That would be the "proof in the pudding" so to speak.

Haven't you said many times that you detest these "beyond great" monsters, and would prefer it if they would instead play Saint Of Me, and stuff like that?

At times I have grown tired of them. Like I said, I could make a list of over 150 Stones songs that I consider to be great and would like to hear played live, but the average Stones concert goer doesn't see it the way many of us do. They want to hear the blockbusters. I always want to hear SFM, Midnight Rambler, and JJF, Out Of Control, and Saint Of Me, but beyond that I want to hear brand new Stones music, or at least more rarities.

.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-03-28 17:11 by camper88.

The Stones have many great songs, The Band have many great songs, The Beach Boys have many great songs, CCR have many great songs. There are many artists with many great songs. I wouldn't say there's anything unique about The Stones.

Still trying to think of something that is "bigger" than the person or persons who created it. I'll have to get back to you on that ....

Quote
tatters
Still trying to think of something that is "bigger" than the person or persons who created it. I'll have to get back to you on that ....

Keith's persona



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-09-06 05:36 by Max'sKansasCity.

The Stones hit us in a certain way... for some of us Keith's riffs are the highlight of music itself. Other wonderful human beings could care less! Taste in music in very subjective.

The shame about the Stones is that their songs are indeed AMAZING, to the point that folks are disappointed unless they get to hear Satisfaction for the 20th time (or first time).

BTW, I say this as a listen to the 1978 JFK concert which was poorly reviewed, but to me sounds FANTASTIC. Supposedly a mediocre show with a bad crowd. The recording sounds like the band is playing great and the audience are digging the songs!

Too great for who?

Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
A thought popped into my brain today that I thought I would share with you concerning the repeating of the classics. Is it possible that the Stones created songs that are beyond great? I mean, to my ears there are just so damn many great Stones songs that I love listening to. I could list at least 150 songs that I thoroughly enjoy. To my ears those 150 songs are all great. But it is more than obvious that the Stones have their "blockbusters" that go beyond great. These are the songs that the vast majority of concert goers want to hear, and would be disappointed if they were not played at every live concert. Maybe it is time for us to put these songs in a category above great? Maybe we even need to invent a word for them? I used blockbusters, but maybe there is a better word to describe them? Can anyone think of another band that has as many "blockbuster" songs as the Stones have? I mean, if the Beatles were still all alive and touring what 20 or so songs would they be playing from their peak years? And, would they have the same impact as the Stones blockbusters? Just a thought, but it appears the Stones have created songs that have grown bigger than the band itself. Any thoughts?

And we must admit that some of the Stones material has aged very well, nearly all the material made in the 70s has aged very, very well.

For example Exile wasn't very positively received when it came out but later it has grown to a giant classic.

And many of us like Goats Head Soup very much as well as Black and Blue and Some Girls is a classic record of course.

Is Dirty Work just too dirty, or just too much work?

I disagree with thread starter.

Are Stones "Classics" Just Too Great?

Does sex just feel too good?

No. "Soul Survivor" is just as great as
"Tumbling Dice" (if not better) for an example.

There are other songs from Voodoo Lounge better
than "You Got Me Rocking" .

I do understand what the original poster is
trying to say,though.

They have created "monsters" that prevent them
from playing the set lists that they really want to play.

The Stones don't have the freedom of a new band.
They could but not if they want to charge the current prices @ the current venues ..... the
corporate world is heavily involved @ this point.

Quote
Winning Ugly VXII
No. "Soul Survivor" is just as great as
"Tumbling Dice" (if not better) for an example.

Weird.
Soul Survivor is my least favorite song on Exile.
Tumbling Dice is rock & roll greatness.

Quote
BowieStone

Quote
Winning Ugly VXII
No. "Soul Survivor" is just as great as
"Tumbling Dice" (if not better) for an example.

Weird.
Soul Survivor is my least favorite song on Exile.
Tumbling Dice is rock & roll greatness.

"Soul Survivor" and side four of Exile are perfection. Yes they made songs bigger than themselves. They have never been able to perform more than half their catalog and this is not a criticism, their creative studio minds are different than their stage acumen.

Quote
DoomandGloom

Quote
BowieStone

Quote
Winning Ugly VXII
No. "Soul Survivor" is just as great as
"Tumbling Dice" (if not better) for an example.

Weird.
Soul Survivor is my least favorite song on Exile.
Tumbling Dice is rock & roll greatness.

"Soul Survivor" and side four of Exile are perfection. Yes they made songs bigger than themselves. They have never been able to perform more than half their catalog and this is not a criticism, their creative studio minds are different than their stage acumen.

While I agree with you to some extent, and your argument is well put, I would argue that there is an inherent laziness there. They just haven't had to dig a little deeper for the live act, so they haven't using the excuse that this is what the audience wants. Other big acts dig deeper into their catalogue and the Stones could. They're just not motivated too.

Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
A thought popped into my brain today that I thought I would share with you concerning the repeating of the classics. Is it possible that the Stones created songs that are beyond great? I mean, to my ears there are just so damn many great Stones songs that I love listening to. I could list at least 150 songs that I thoroughly enjoy. To my ears those 150 songs are all great. But it is more than obvious that the Stones have their "blockbusters" that go beyond great. These are the songs that the vast majority of concert goers want to hear, and would be disappointed if they were not played at every live concert. Maybe it is time for us to put these songs in a category above great? Maybe we even need to invent a word for them? I used blockbusters, but maybe there is a better word to describe them? Can anyone think of another band that has as many "blockbuster" songs as the Stones have? I mean, if the Beatles were still all alive and touring what 20 or so songs would they be playing from their peak years? And, would they have the same impact as the Stones blockbusters? Just a thought, but it appears the Stones have created songs that have grown bigger than the band itself. Any thoughts?

Congratulations, you have truly arrived!