Tell Me :
Talk
Don't worry, it's already evening here
-------------------
Keep On Rolling
2 of they are dead.
The question is: will the Stones last after they've gone, like the Beatles have last after they broke up. I think they will last because of the quality of their music and great songs during the first ten years. Just like the Beatles.
Ian Stewart ..
that's the show part to be sure- but otherwise- you really never hear them talk about the past -or pay much mind to it- when you hear them speak, esp. jagger, very little shrift is given to the past.
I guess. It's just that what's next is usually a long vacation.
Nice post. Except I would argue it's the first 20 years worth of songs. IORR, Miss You, Start Me Up are certainly as well known as the earlier works. In fact you can still catch Start Me Up being played at sporting events.
Haha! Well put, Tatters.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Why the Stones survive
Posted by:
hbwriter
()
Date: December 11, 2013 22:37
Partly, anyway, in my opinion, is that they are brutally unsentimental. Like a shark, they just always push ahead, they may circle back once in awhile just see what they missed or how to get something out of previously covered ground, but in the end they have always been about what's next, vs. what's passed.
Sorry for the mid-afternoon philosophizing. But where else would I go with this but here?
Sorry for the mid-afternoon philosophizing. But where else would I go with this but here?
Re: Why the Stones survive
Posted by:
Rolling Hansie
()
Date: December 11, 2013 22:44
Quote
hbwriter
Sorry for the mid-afternoon philosophizing.
Don't worry, it's already evening here
-------------------
Keep On Rolling
Re: Why the Stones survive
Posted by:
hbwriter
()
Date: December 11, 2013 22:45
Quote
Rolling HansieQuote
hbwriter
Sorry for the mid-afternoon philosophizing.
Don't worry, it's already evening here
Re: Why the Stones survive
Posted by:
Stoneage
()
Date: December 11, 2013 22:51
Yes, but that theory doesn't really agree with their setlists which are all about nostalgia.
Re: Why the Stones survive
Posted by:
Rockman
()
Date: December 11, 2013 22:53
....they do it their way .... always have, always will
ROCKMAN
ROCKMAN
Re: Why the Stones survive
Posted by:
His Majesty
()
Date: December 11, 2013 23:03
Have "they" really survived though?
They are half the band they used to be.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-12-11 23:09 by His Majesty.
They are half the band they used to be.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-12-11 23:09 by His Majesty.
Re: Why the Stones survive
Posted by:
His Majesty
()
Date: December 11, 2013 23:10
Quote
caesar
They're still alive?
2 of they are dead.
Re: Why the Stones survive
Posted by:
duke richardson
()
Date: December 11, 2013 23:18
at the beginning, a classic example of dedication and right band, right time and place. Charlie Watts.
later, it seems to me that they made the decision to write songs 'people would want to listen to'...then found that they could in fact do just that..
after all its the songs..and the look, they look like what a unique rock and roll band ( who operates with a lot of different approaches to music) should look like..
later, it seems to me that they made the decision to write songs 'people would want to listen to'...then found that they could in fact do just that..
after all its the songs..and the look, they look like what a unique rock and roll band ( who operates with a lot of different approaches to music) should look like..
Re: Why the Stones survive
Posted by:
dcba
()
Date: December 11, 2013 23:31
Imho it's because they've become a worldwide brand like Apple, Coca Cola or Mc Donald's.
They have a logo (the tongue) and a name that are recognized on all 5 continents.
They regularly make a worldwide publicity campaign (call it "a new album and a new tour") to make sure people don't forget the name of the brand.
Bands fade, brands with the appropriate amount of publicity don't fade.
Plus ppl like to buy stuff from big brands : "hey yesterday (2007 or 2012) I went to a Stones show for the 1st time ever". It's very much like "hey dude check my 1st Iphone, I bought it yesterday!!"
Brands give the consumer an ego boost, cos products from big brands have an aura and a mystique to them. They may not be better than what the competition offers but they do have "the" thing.
That's why the Stones last.
They have a logo (the tongue) and a name that are recognized on all 5 continents.
They regularly make a worldwide publicity campaign (call it "a new album and a new tour") to make sure people don't forget the name of the brand.
Bands fade, brands with the appropriate amount of publicity don't fade.
Plus ppl like to buy stuff from big brands : "hey yesterday (2007 or 2012) I went to a Stones show for the 1st time ever". It's very much like "hey dude check my 1st Iphone, I bought it yesterday!!"
Brands give the consumer an ego boost, cos products from big brands have an aura and a mystique to them. They may not be better than what the competition offers but they do have "the" thing.
That's why the Stones last.
Re: Why the Stones survive
Posted by:
RaahenTiikeri
()
Date: December 11, 2013 23:33
2 of they are dead.
-who has died?....i thought Brian Jones is only died Rolling Stone...
-who has died?....i thought Brian Jones is only died Rolling Stone...
Re: Why the Stones survive
Posted by:
Torres
()
Date: December 11, 2013 23:36
For the recent past, my answer for that is Jagger.
He's the driving force, the big celebrity that brings general non fans to the concerts and keeps his and the band's image up to date. The stones survive because Mick knows how to survive like very few artists do.
He's the driving force, the big celebrity that brings general non fans to the concerts and keeps his and the band's image up to date. The stones survive because Mick knows how to survive like very few artists do.
Re: Why the Stones survive
Posted by:
Greg
()
Date: December 11, 2013 23:46
WOII hardened their bodies, made them hungry for the rest of their lives.
----------------------------
"Music is the frozen tapioca in the ice chest of history."
"Shit!... No shit, awright!"
----------------------------
"Music is the frozen tapioca in the ice chest of history."
"Shit!... No shit, awright!"
Re: Why the Stones survive
Posted by:
kleermaker
()
Date: December 11, 2013 23:48
Quote
dcba
Imho it's because they've become a worldwide brand like Apple, Coca Cola or Mc Donald's.
They have a logo (the tongue) and a name that are recognized on all 5 continents.
They regularly make a worldwide publicity campaign (call it "a new album and a new tour") to make sure people don't forget the name of the brand.
Bands fade, brands with the appropriate amount of publicity don't fade.
Plus ppl like to buy stuff from big brands : "hey yesterday (2007 or 2012) I went to a Stones show for the 1st time ever". It's very much like "hey dude check my 1st Iphone, I bought it yesterday!!"
Brands give the consumer an ego boost, cos products from big brands have an aura and a mystique to them. They may not be better than what the competition offers but they do have "the" thing.
That's why the Stones last.
The question is: will the Stones last after they've gone, like the Beatles have last after they broke up. I think they will last because of the quality of their music and great songs during the first ten years. Just like the Beatles.
Re: Why the Stones survive
Posted by:
duke richardson
()
Date: December 11, 2013 23:50
Quote
RaahenTiikeri
2 of they are dead.
-who has died?....i thought Brian Jones is only died Rolling Stone...
Ian Stewart ..
Re: Why the Stones survive
Posted by:
stonehearted
()
Date: December 12, 2013 00:13
They have survived because, early on, they removed themselves from the old-world master-slave relationship once enjoyed by record companies and essentially became a corporation unto themselves, signing lucrative multi-album deals with one record distributor before moving on to the next and so on.
It helps also that they have a shrewd business mind inhabiting their front man who understands the bottom line regarding their audience.
Obviously, The Stones are no longer about new music and breaking new ground artistically. They are there now to satisfy the demand that they simply do what is expected of them, that is, to celebrate the old songs that their fans will never allow them to even attempt to surpass, even if the band could.
As long as there is still a demand for a live audience to hear the songs that were made eternally famous, they will "survive".
It helps also that they have a shrewd business mind inhabiting their front man who understands the bottom line regarding their audience.
Obviously, The Stones are no longer about new music and breaking new ground artistically. They are there now to satisfy the demand that they simply do what is expected of them, that is, to celebrate the old songs that their fans will never allow them to even attempt to surpass, even if the band could.
As long as there is still a demand for a live audience to hear the songs that were made eternally famous, they will "survive".
Re: Why the Stones survive
Posted by:
ChrisM
()
Date: December 12, 2013 00:38
"they are brutally unsentimental". Interesting view point considering most of their live shows consist of songs recorded 30 or more years ago. To me at least they persist because there is still an audience for what the do, at least from a live perspective...
Re: Why the Stones survive
Posted by:
hbwriter
()
Date: December 12, 2013 02:32
Quote
ChrisM
"they are brutally unsentimental". Interesting view point considering most of their live shows consist of songs recorded 30 or more years ago. To me at least they persist because there is still an audience for what the do, at least from a live perspective...
that's the show part to be sure- but otherwise- you really never hear them talk about the past -or pay much mind to it- when you hear them speak, esp. jagger, very little shrift is given to the past.
Re: Why the Stones survive
Posted by:
latebloomer
()
Date: December 12, 2013 03:25
Not so sure about the unsentimental part. To be seen as nostalgic and sentimental clashes with their well crafted image. But if you listen to or read some of their interviews in the past year, there are glimpses of wistfulness. The Rolling Stones is a huge corporation, but it's CEO's are still just a few guys, heading into their twilight years.
All that money does make the ride a lot more comfortable, though.
All that money does make the ride a lot more comfortable, though.
Re: Why the Stones survive
Posted by:
tatters
()
Date: December 12, 2013 04:20
Quote
hbwriter
in the end they have always been about what's next
I guess. It's just that what's next is usually a long vacation.
Re: Why the Stones survive
Posted by:
24FPS
()
Date: December 12, 2013 05:12
Quote
kleermakerQuote
dcba
Imho it's because they've become a worldwide brand like Apple, Coca Cola or Mc Donald's.
They have a logo (the tongue) and a name that are recognized on all 5 continents.
They regularly make a worldwide publicity campaign (call it "a new album and a new tour") to make sure people don't forget the name of the brand.
Bands fade, brands with the appropriate amount of publicity don't fade.
Plus ppl like to buy stuff from big brands : "hey yesterday (2007 or 2012) I went to a Stones show for the 1st time ever". It's very much like "hey dude check my 1st Iphone, I bought it yesterday!!"
Brands give the consumer an ego boost, cos products from big brands have an aura and a mystique to them. They may not be better than what the competition offers but they do have "the" thing.
That's why the Stones last.
The question is: will the Stones last after they've gone, like the Beatles have last after they broke up. I think they will last because of the quality of their music and great songs during the first ten years. Just like the Beatles.
Nice post. Except I would argue it's the first 20 years worth of songs. IORR, Miss You, Start Me Up are certainly as well known as the earlier works. In fact you can still catch Start Me Up being played at sporting events.
Re: Why the Stones survive
Posted by:
Stoneage
()
Date: December 12, 2013 09:34
Quote
tattersQuote
hbwriter
in the end they have always been about what's next
I guess. It's just that what's next is usually a long vacation.
Haha! Well put, Tatters.
Re: Why the Stones survive
Posted by:
Glammy
()
Date: December 12, 2013 10:20
It's not really a band anymore. In fact, it isn't a band for a many many years. They come together every few years to record something and to go on tour and then they don't see each other for months or even years. It's more of like a project run by bunch of people living off their past/history and knowing how to make the most cash out of it. But it's not like they are somewhat relevant in todays music scene or that they are coming together and rehearse on a regular basis. It's not a real band. It's a brand.
Re: Why the Stones survive
Posted by:
Stoneage
()
Date: December 12, 2013 10:57
On the other hand, maybe taking long vacations and staying away from each other and recording studios is the only way a band can stay together for five decades? Most bands can't manage even a decade...
Re: Why the Stones survive
Posted by:
crholmstrom
()
Date: December 12, 2013 10:58
They went down to the crossroads...
Re: Why the Stones survive
Posted by:
dcba
()
Date: December 12, 2013 12:21
Sure it's Mick : since 1989 he's been like Shiva. One arm to write the bulk of the new material, one arm to set the band in motion for every tour, one arm to sign the contracts and one arm and a mouth to feed the media beast and keep the band as a living "en vogue" entity, not a bunch of old pensioners!
Well done Mick!
Well done Mick!
Re: Why the Stones survive
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: December 12, 2013 12:35
And it goes way back. Just read a Mick Taylor interview discussing the times he join in (back in 1969). He describes how determinate Jagger was then taking the band back to touring, making sure they are up to it (Taylor being a part of that package). It is the qualities hbwriter describes in his opening post that are nothing but Mick Jagger's. Jagger is the one who pushes the back forward, making sure they are relevant and contemporary enough to confront the challenges of the day.
- Doxa
- Doxa
Re: Why the Stones survive
Posted by:
stonehearted
()
Date: December 12, 2013 12:46
^ That fierce determination on Mick's part to push The Stones into relevant new territory--to do something great--was already there before Mick played with The Stones. Marianne in her book describes how wrapped up in the Beggars Banquet sessions he was, how he would spend all night at the studio, always deeply focused on the task at hand, because it was important that they make their big comeback from their lapse into psychedelia and transform themselves back from the "We Love You/Dandelion" flower power dabblers to the bad boys they had become known for. Keith was also focused at this time and they were working great as a team then and they got the results they were after.
Re: Why the Stones survive
Posted by:
rollmops
()
Date: December 12, 2013 13:45
The rolling stones have survived because of their huge and consistant success. They have turn the band into a" brand" to use a nowadays term. The success has also a lot to do with all the great songs they have written and performed over all those decades.
Rock and roll,
Mops
Rock and roll,
Mops
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
ChrisMahavishnu , gaizoku , highgatehillbilly , Justjon , llsbsk , ManuelStones , rastakeith , voodoodrew
Guests:
1727
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10