For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
emotionalbarbecueQuote
Mathijs
The latter day tracks are not classics because they are not classics. Would they have been released in the 70's the Stones would have disappeared from the scene, just like most bands disappeared when the quality dropped after a couple of good albums. The only reason why the Stones could do the major tours of the 90’s and 00’s is because they are an institution. It certainly wasn’t due to the quality of studio material released.
Mathijs
Good point...
But it is not possible to know wether these songs would have reached the status of classics.
More importantly (and also impossible to know). would the official classics have been acknowledged as such if they would have been released during the last decade for example?.....I think that no, they would not.
Quote
lem motlow
mathijs,by saying "classics of the early 70s wouldnt be classics in the 90s" you're sort of agreeing with the original posters premise that songs can be looked at in a different way because of the era in which they were released.
if brown sugar came out in 97 and received no airplay,was thought of as just some of the same old stones crap would that make it a different song?
i have no doubt that if love is strong came out in 73 when the band was on fire we would be talking about how great the guitar sound was back then and what a great riff it was...and be asking why cant they make songs like that now
No big science - most music from the 50-70'ies would be considered oldfashioned decades later played as it was in 50-70'ies.Quote
Mathijs
And the classics of the early 70's would not be classics in the 90's: they would be considered old fashioned. But play Brown Sugar with more distorted guitars, a 5/4 drum pattern and angry vocals and it would have been the biggest grunge hit ever in '91.
Mathijs
Quote
Mathijs
The latter day tracks are not classics because they are not classics. Would they have been released in the 70's the Stones would have disappeared from the scene, just like most bands disappeared when the quality dropped after a couple of good albums. The only reason why the Stones could do the major tours of the 90’s and 00’s is because they are an institution. It certainly wasn’t due to the quality of studio material released.
Mathijs
Quote
noughties
Fans use to think bands should stick to their first style.
Quote
Send It To me
I maintain that It's Only Rock N' Roll is a very, very mediocre record for the Stones (Except for the first three tracks) - I listen to Voodoo Lounge and A Bigger Bang more than IORR. Yet, the simple advantage of it being released in '74 elevates it.
Quote
MathijsQuote
Send It To me
I maintain that It's Only Rock N' Roll is a very, very mediocre record for the Stones (Except for the first three tracks) - I listen to Voodoo Lounge and A Bigger Bang more than IORR. Yet, the simple advantage of it being released in '74 elevates it.
Well sure, ou listen to VL more than IORR.
But fact is that in 2012 you are probably the only one listening to VL, whilst they still sell a million or so IORR albums per year....
Mathijs
Quote
Pink Floyds's Division Bell could be an absolutely classic album if it were release in 1977 instead 1994[/quote
C'mon now...
Quote
stonesdan60
Regarding the point that even the best latter day Stones tunes don't deserve "classic" status because they didn't sell and become hits, I feel that's missing a huge point. Earlier Stones tunes became hits for more than one reason. They were good songs AND "hit" radio was playing that style of music back then. In more recent days the Stones have done lots of songs that would have surely gotten airplay in the seventies but in recent times, radio is not playing Stones-type music, thus it's pretty much impossible for the Stones to have had a "hit" lately no matter how good the song. They could hypothetically come up with something as good as their biggest hits of yore and it would never become a hit today because radio wouldn't play it. However, to Stones fans, their music should be judged on it's own merits, not how many copies it sold in a market that doesn't play their music anymore. Thus, to me, a song like Out Of Tears ranks as a classic because it's good. I'm sure loads of latter day Stones songs would get heavy FM radio play if they came out in the seventies.
Quote
theanchormanQuote
Pink Floyds's Division Bell could be an absolutely classic album if it were release in 1977 instead 1994[/quote
C'mon now...
Bahahahahaha!!!!!
Everyone's first thought would be "Where the f@#$ is Roger???"
[thepowergoats.com]
You might notice I started a thread on it...lots of great material I think.Quote
noughties
quoute treaclefingers:
"I'm going out on a limb here, but I'd say that they could probably perform an entire concert of material released from Dirty Work on (as little as possible from Dirty Work please), that would be an amazing concert!"
Yeah, and how nice wouldn`t that be! A diehard`s dream! I really can`t see why people should feel cheated. It`s all music in the same vein as the warhorses!
Quote
MathijsQuote
Send It To me
I maintain that It's Only Rock N' Roll is a very, very mediocre record for the Stones (Except for the first three tracks) - I listen to Voodoo Lounge and A Bigger Bang more than IORR. Yet, the simple advantage of it being released in '74 elevates it.
Well sure, ou listen to VL more than IORR.
But fact is that in 2012 you are probably the only one listening to VL, whilst they still sell a million or so IORR albums per year....
Mathijs
Quote
Max'sKansasCity
Quote
GJV
Rough Justice was not a singel.