Apart from any American band not reaching the same heights as The Rolling Stones and The Beatles have done around the world.American's have done alot of great things in the past and will continue to do so.But ya' would think a country where Rock 'n' Roll started and with a population that size this would of been achieved years ago.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-05-28 03:38 by colonial.

I don't think any band from anywhere will ever be as big as the Stones.
Perhaps a couple here & there might get to play arenas for a certain stretch of time, but none will ever do that for as long as the Stones have.

BTW colonial, skipstone says: "Would ya let colonial know that it was great fun to razz him?"
I'm sure he means that in a very lighthearted way.

um er no!!!!!!!!!!!!

Quote
Edith Grove
I don't think any band from anywhere will ever be as big as the Stones.
Perhaps a couple here & there might get to play arenas for a certain stretch of time, but none will ever do that for as long as the Stones have.

BTW colonial, skipstone says: "Would ya let colonial know that it was great fun to razz him?"
I'm sure he means that in a very lighthearted way.

Edith Grove..yea' cheers mate I checked out Skipstones band ya' posted Grayson Capps and The Stumpknockers and ya' know something mate I really like it..a really good lead singer and a cool look'n dude at that yea'.Skipstone his even perfected Keiths style on smoke'n has fag..good one.

yea' I hope Skipstone comes back



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-05-28 05:53 by colonial.

If there's a rock and roll heaven, I bet they've got a hell of a band...

My husband, who was born in 1942,( yes, he is as old as the Rolling Stones!) swears that Elvis in the late fifties, (I know he was not a whole band, but had Scotty Moore as his guitarist) was as big as the Beatles.

no. The Stones are the best and the greatest band ever in anyplace.

No, there's no U.S. band that can or will reach those heights, since rock and roll is basically dead, with a few new, young bands weakly trying to copy past glory. Don't forget that U.S. rock royal had its present and future beheaded in one year with the deaths of Hendrix, Joplin, Morrison and Duane Allman. Try imagining it had been Jimmy Page, Mick Jagger, Roger Waters and David Bowie killed off between September 1970 to October 1971.

The Beatles greatest influence, Buddy Holly, was dead at 22. Don't you think he would have accomplished more? We almost lost Dylan from a motorcycle wreck in 1966. What did the U.K. lose? The shell of Brian Jones? T-Rex? I can't think of anyone the U.K. loss of any great rock importance in their prime. Even John Lennon died here. The closest thing you came to a mid-career loss was John Bonham, and let's face it, Led Zeppelin had peaked long ago.

Who knows what Hendrix would have done? He was going through a rough patch when he croaked, in London, but he certainly wasn't on the far downside. Joplin found a whole new gear with 'Me & Bobby McGee', posthumously. Morrison was burned out and troubled, but he could have comeback. The previous album, L.A. Woman was a stunner. And Duane Allman was just flat out on equal footing with the best guitarists in the world. He was quite capable of moving the Allman Brothers into more jazzier territory, freeing them from that 'Southern Rock' label.

No, it's true, no USA rock band will ever be as Great as the Stones. So, I'll turn the question back on you..........will any U.K. INDIVIDUAL performer ever be as great as Elvis, Michael Jackson, Marvin Gaye?..........oh, it goes on and on.

Quote
24FPS
No, there's no U.S. band that can or will reach those heights, since rock and roll is basically dead, with a few new, young bands weakly trying to copy past glory. Don't forget that U.S. rock royal had its present and future beheaded in one year with the deaths of Hendrix, Joplin, Morrison and Duane Allman. Try imagining it had been Jimmy Page, Mick Jagger, Roger Waters and David Bowie killed off between September 1970 to October 1971.

The Beatles greatest influence, Buddy Holly, was dead at 22. Don't you think he would have accomplished more? We almost lost Dylan from a motorcycle wreck in 1966. What did the U.K. lose? The shell of Brian Jones? T-Rex? I can't think of anyone the U.K. loss of any great rock importance in their prime. Even John Lennon died here. The closest thing you came to a mid-career loss was John Bonham, and let's face it, Led Zeppelin had peaked long ago.

Who knows what Hendrix would have done? He was going through a rough patch when he croaked, in London, but he certainly wasn't on the far downside. Joplin found a whole new gear with 'Me & Bobby McGee', posthumously. Morrison was burned out and troubled, but he could have comeback. The previous album, L.A. Woman was a stunner. And Duane Allman was just flat out on equal footing with the best guitarists in the world. He was quite capable of moving the Allman Brothers into more jazzier territory, freeing them from that 'Southern Rock' label.

No, it's true, no USA rock band will ever be as Great as the Stones. So, I'll turn the question back on you..........will any U.K. INDIVIDUAL performer ever be as great as Elvis, Michael Jackson, Marvin Gaye?..........oh, it goes on and on.

24FPS..Elvis Presley is the greatest individual performer of all time theres certainly no doubt about that.

The fact remains: Americans invented rock 'n' roll, and, without that, all these poncey English bands have nothing upon which to base their acts. So kiss my -ss sideways.

Quote
ab
The fact remains: Americans invented rock 'n' roll, and, without that, all these poncey English bands have nothing upon which to base their acts. So kiss my -ss sideways.

Skipstone..Skipstone is that you mate, just like the good old times again..Good on ya' mate..

In '91 Guns & Roses where bigger than the Stones.

Mathijs

Will anyone in the UK ever be as big as Elvis?

I think there is always the possibility of great virtuoso performers arising from anywhere - Nijinsky, arguably the world's greatest ballerino, was the child of Polish farmers - but I agree with the poster above in that I think the rock genre is played out and no current or future rock band will ever reach the heights of power or originality that the great rock bands of the past have attained.

Of course, people will always want entertainment, and have to make do with what's available....

Quote
Mathijs
In '91 Guns & Roses where bigger than the Stones.

Mathijs

Ahhh but they weren't in '89/'90 & '94/'95............



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-05-28 12:07 by EddieByword.

Quote
Sleepy City
Will anyone in the UK ever be as big as Elvis?

Well there was a documentry on here recently about 64 stone man.........he was pretty big but I'm not sure if he was bigger than Elvis..............

"Will any USA Band EVER be as Great as The Stones?"

Nope.

Because music has lost it's impact it had on society and cultures, completely - it's a show-business thingy now, goes hand in hand with TV reality shows. People hardly buy records anymore.

So if there ever was any absolutely terrific US R&R band, I bet they would be overlooked by everybody apart from the few ones with their ears open.
And a band needs to grow before they can get 'really good' - but without audiences or recordbuyers that actually listens and cares, they won't grow

Quote
ab
The fact remains: Americans invented rock 'n' roll, and, without that, all these poncey English bands have nothing upon which to base their acts. So kiss my -ss sideways.

Ahhh but the English invented the guitar and without that you lot wouldn't have had anything to play your rock'n'roll on.............so we helped you out big time with that one huh ?....so you can stick that in your pipe and smoke it pal..........



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2011-05-28 14:56 by EddieByword.

I don't think any band from anywhere will ever be as big as the Stones.

At least not on this web site anyway. Now THAT is a sure thing.

In short, no! In fact it is highly likely there will never be superbands ever again. The Beatles and The Stones came out of the UK following the 2nd World War - war babies, and it is this which sparked the musical revolution. It's true that without the likes of Elvis and the great US Bluesmen, there would have been no Stones or Beatles and if there was neither of these two, then I wonder where music would have gone and what shape it would have taken.

It's sad really that the supergroup is a dead concept...maybe we need another world war to spark something off again. Even then the way the music business controls everything I doubt it would hugely change. We have been lucky to experience these bands, our ancestors will look back at the 60' and 70's with envy. In the meantime lets sit back and lauch at the pathetic attempts of the likes of the Foo Fighters who flap about like they are creating something earth shattering, when in reality its just a dirge of weak riffs on the top of hopeless songs. RIP quality rock music.

Quote
Erik_Snow
Nope.

Because music has lost it's impact it had on society and cultures, completely - it's a show-business thingy now, goes hand in hand with TV reality shows. People hardly buy records anymore.

Absolutely the truth.

The Stones were part of a social and cultural revolution in which music played a big part.

They were on the crest of the pop wave that started in the 50's and swept right on through the 60's.

They were NOTORIOUS because of who they were, what they did and what they looked like. Stuff that nobody bats an eyelid at these days.

The Stones, their music AND the times they were lucky enough to be part of are all part of the magic.

It is unlikely to happen like that again.

As far quality matters, OF COURSE NOT! If one is 'greatest' by definition it is logically impossible to have anyone as great...

But people seem to talk in quantity terms such as "biggest" - which is bit vague term as well - of course, there have been bigger bands occasionally, but not probably in a long term. Maybe Guns'n'Roses was bigger in '91 but so was The Monkees in '66-'68, and so on...

- Doxa

depends what you mean. TH EAGLES have sold many more albums than the stones here in the united states and have fewer albums than the stones.

There are so many kids playing in bands these days, compared to back in the 60s, so it is much more difficult become well known, even on a local basis first. Then you need to become well known regional, and then eventually nationwide. It's takes much more hurdles to get really well known based on your music these days. And that's not enough, you need some really good marketing to get you out there and make yourself visible.

The Stones and Beatles were lucky, they did something new, there wasn't much competition, and they had some excellent marketing.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-05-28 14:14 by Koen.

.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-05-31 01:01 by Max'sKansasCity.

I agree with anyone who said that no band will be what the Stones are.

Nope. The Beatles and the Stones were the top --

We Yanks did have artists that could at times rival them - The Beach Boys, The Byrds, but they could not sustain it over the years.

We also had a great 60's band that cranked out killer hits called Paul Revere and the Raiders...

And we have Dylan.... and Springsteen......

But you guys over in the UK win the prize hands down...

NO!