Tell Me :
Talk
1969 still has the problem of the missing, kick starting Rolling Stones founding member.
Despite, but also because of the screaming girls and testosterone loaded boys, The Rolling Stones provided exciting, engaging music onstage. Lovely mass sing along on Ruby Tuesday as well during that 1967 tour.
A true live Rolling Stones experience, not one brought about through the aid of gifted, but essentially hired people.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-06-06 00:29 by His Majesty.
This comment speaks for itself: rancour. Well, deal with it.
"We recognise in others that which we know most deeply within ourselves."
- Robert Fripp
Neither you or I have experienced the true Rolling Stones live in concert. Deal with your denial.
Best post ever.
Not really, but I am not in denial of the fact I haven't seen the true Rolling Stones.
Don't be sorry...
A damn fine description of the phenomenon we are wittnessing... I was just reading ROLLING STONE's list of ten features of bad rock star behaviour (or what it was called), and now reading your stuff here made me think that the phenomenon you are describing here is like an ideal example of a perfect rock and roll show these days according to their taste. A common feature being that all the challenging and 'dangerous' elements are thrown out from the package.
I haven't recently reflected the phenomenon from a bird's perspective (or tried to keep that out of mind), but been more concerned on details, gig by gig, and thought that the time to go back for to more general perspective - how does this all look in a bigger picture - will be in future, when the tour is history. Of course, my stance is in a par with yours.
I especially feel connected to your idea that the "common deminator" being "a lack of an artistic compotent" - I guess that's sumps up the reasons for my "complaints" for years here. For me the reason to dig this band comes from getting artistic pleasure, and I feel rather dissatisfied in that sense. I like going to see the band once in a while - like soon to Hyde Park - and I know what I am going to get: it will be just having a good time, once again enjoying the presence of these legends and same setlist of hits. Will there be Taylor or not, I don't actually care. I don't even care if they play 'good' or 'bad' - from an artistic point of view, that doesn't really matter, since there is not that factor. And I don't even believe that there is a chance for that factor any longer - it is just "entertainment". I will leave my brains out, and just enjoy myself. In my book, £95 is an alright sum for that.
Anyway that's my tactics to cope with the phenomenon you described wonderfully.
I hope to hear more from you in future.
- Doxa
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2013-06-06 13:26 by Doxa.
I don't believe you. There are many finer distinctions.
- Doxa
But those usually are sooo booooring.
I love Dylan, but the "Vegas" Stones shows are far better then Dylan's "serious" live shows. The same with others
And even better is Cirque De Soleil, now that's entertaining!
I am sure they are very serious about what they do. The thing is more like if one having an artistic curiosity, being inspired of something - a touch of muse - a will to take riskies, etc. The greatness of the Stones used to be that they had a very curious mind, damn strong self-security, and an ability to look forward, and not leave to enjoy the achieved results. When the thing was done, all their energy put in that, they forget it, and took the next project. They are very pragmatic, and do have not have unneeded illusions of their game.
But I guess what you mean by "not taking themselves too seriously" is something like not being pretentious, or something. But I guess no any great artist is "too serious" in that sense. Does Picasso or Dylan taking themselves "too seriouly"? They do what they do, as great and so seriously they can, and it's up to critics or people in general to judge the results.
- Doxa
You seem to have some kind of issue with this "serious" term. Meaning something like "not easy to stomach, not entertaining, too intellectual, too challenging, too unpreditable" or what?... For me in Dylan shows there is nothing else serious that the guy seems to be serious in what he does, but I find the shows funny, witty, challenging, unpredictable. I guess the term "entertaining" is something I don't usually connect to them. But I guess that's the reason why you prefer the Stones shows over his.
What goes for the "serious" fans, I'd like to hear what's the problem with them? That they have a mind of their own, an ability to judge what they see, and put it in words? And what's a "non-serious fan"?
- Doxa
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2013-06-06 14:28 by Doxa.
"Serious" fans seem to enjoy nowdays Stones shows very much IMO, but they also cry about the good old days so they are VERY nostalgic in their own way. And that's a little bit boring for me.
So basically the difference between "serious" fans and "non-serious" fans is that the former have a better understanding of the whole career of the Stones, and ability to relate the recent happenings to a bigger picture, while the latter lack that historical understanding and think what they see is the "best Stones yet" if they think anything at all?
Anyway, I can't see myself belonging to that category of "serious fans" by your definition, so this for me... you know... just theoretical talk. And not serious at all!
- Doxa
Who's fighting and what for?
If we are all one, let's show it, right?
Oh, Woodstock Nation turned out to be hype? Thanks for the news.
'Fraid not, because he only provided entertainment for his family.
If I had the choice to choose to see the 'true' Rolling Stones I would always choose the version of the band that I've seen. To me the best band ever to be on stage. At the brink of the end of an era they still mattered in many ways, that is socially, musically, artistically and culturally.
I always found curious, in a genuine away, this kind of feelings posted here, which I admit are pretty much opposed to my own current perspective about the band. This is loving the band no matter what, a faithful position for all the good moments through life. I totally respect that, yet I think the "time moving on" argument is more like an excuse to maintain this fidelity at any cost. Somewhat like a religious belief.
Well I like freedom of sight. And call it business, not taking themselves seriously, whatever, but the Stones had a delicious, bigger than life dimension, even when they tried to act serious. The candid image of Ronnie staring at the camera in the SMU video for me is such a beautiful example of that. The entertainment was crazy, risky, provocative. It had real substance, something that will stand through time. Sure it was something from another era, things are done differently today. But I think the Stones don't belong to today's way of making mass entertainment. They risk going from immortality to becoming mere mortals. Usually it's the opposite way.
Imagine if all the Doors members were still alive and the band was still playing, with guests, repeating the same setlists. Imagine Jimi Hendrix. Imagine the Beatles, doing a Yellow Submarine tour, with guests, a Cirque du Soleil special.
Imagine Abba, who refuse to reunite, to many fans sadness. They would sell out night after night after night... For the sake of?
Still alive or alreay past this world, for me the artists I mentioned have this in common: they are immortals. And we all need immortals to admire. For me the Stones still belong in that category. But they shouldn't take it for granted.
Torres
You missed the real thing, no choice available after the 1967 European Tour.
This other waffle, which can be argued about, is just a way for you to add more credence to something you deem to be the best. Best band ever onstage? Considering all of the live music that has happened, you deem a 1973 Taylor widdle fest to be the best ever? Lol!
you're no fun at all
He may not be fun, but he is correct.
It is all much more simple than many want to make it.
what we're seeking is fun PLUS simple....the search continues....
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Stones - Entertainment for all your family
Posted by:
His Majesty
()
Date: June 5, 2013 23:48
Quote
kleermakerQuote
His MajestyQuote
kleermaker
It all begun with the stadium rock. The beginning of the inevitable end. The last true Stones concert (not a show) took place in October 1973.
The last full and true Rolling Stones concert took place in Apostolos Nikolaidis Stadium, Athens, Greece on 17th April 1967.
Additional session musicians onstage and a replacement guitarist is not true stones. >
Well, then we must go back to 1969.
Those concerts until 69 were for screaming young teen girls and fighting teen boys with too much testosterone.
1969 still has the problem of the missing, kick starting Rolling Stones founding member.
Despite, but also because of the screaming girls and testosterone loaded boys, The Rolling Stones provided exciting, engaging music onstage. Lovely mass sing along on Ruby Tuesday as well during that 1967 tour.
A true live Rolling Stones experience, not one brought about through the aid of gifted, but essentially hired people.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-06-06 00:29 by His Majesty.
Re: Stones - Entertainment for all your family
Posted by:
kleermaker
()
Date: June 6, 2013 01:35
Quote
His MajestyQuote
kleermakerQuote
His MajestyQuote
kleermaker
It all begun with the stadium rock. The beginning of the inevitable end. The last true Stones concert (not a show) took place in October 1973.
The last full and true Rolling Stones concert took place in Apostolos Nikolaidis Stadium, Athens, Greece on 17th April 1967.
Additional session musicians onstage and a replacement guitarist is not true stones. >
Well, then we must go back to 1969.
Those concerts until 69 were for screaming young teen girls and fighting teen boys with too much testosterone.
1969 still has the problem of the missing, kick starting Rolling Stones founding member.
Despite, but also because of the screaming girls and testosterone loaded boys, The Rolling Stones provided exciting, engaging music onstage. Lovely mass sing along on Ruby Tuesday as well during that 1967 tour.
A true live Rolling Stones experience, not one brought about through the aid of gifted, but essentially hired people.
This comment speaks for itself: rancour. Well, deal with it.
Re: Stones - Entertainment for all your family
Posted by:
His Majesty
()
Date: June 6, 2013 01:51
Quote
kleermakerQuote
His MajestyQuote
kleermakerQuote
His MajestyQuote
kleermaker
It all begun with the stadium rock. The beginning of the inevitable end. The last true Stones concert (not a show) took place in October 1973.
The last full and true Rolling Stones concert took place in Apostolos Nikolaidis Stadium, Athens, Greece on 17th April 1967.
Additional session musicians onstage and a replacement guitarist is not true stones. >
Well, then we must go back to 1969.
Those concerts until 69 were for screaming young teen girls and fighting teen boys with too much testosterone.
1969 still has the problem of the missing, kick starting Rolling Stones founding member.
Despite, but also because of the screaming girls and testosterone loaded boys, The Rolling Stones provided exciting, engaging music onstage. Lovely mass sing along on Ruby Tuesday as well during that 1967 tour.
A true live Rolling Stones experience, not one brought about through the aid of gifted, but essentially hired people.
This comment speaks for itself: rancour. Well, deal with it.
"We recognise in others that which we know most deeply within ourselves."
- Robert Fripp
Neither you or I have experienced the true Rolling Stones live in concert. Deal with your denial.
Re: Stones - Entertainment for all your family
Posted by:
kleermaker
()
Date: June 6, 2013 09:28
Quote
His MajestyQuote
kleermakerQuote
His MajestyQuote
kleermakerQuote
His MajestyQuote
kleermaker
It all begun with the stadium rock. The beginning of the inevitable end. The last true Stones concert (not a show) took place in October 1973.
The last full and true Rolling Stones concert took place in Apostolos Nikolaidis Stadium, Athens, Greece on 17th April 1967.
Additional session musicians onstage and a replacement guitarist is not true stones. >
Well, then we must go back to 1969.
Those concerts until 69 were for screaming young teen girls and fighting teen boys with too much testosterone.
1969 still has the problem of the missing, kick starting Rolling Stones founding member.
Despite, but also because of the screaming girls and testosterone loaded boys, The Rolling Stones provided exciting, engaging music onstage. Lovely mass sing along on Ruby Tuesday as well during that 1967 tour.
A true live Rolling Stones experience, not one brought about through the aid of gifted, but essentially hired people.
This comment speaks for itself: rancour. Well, deal with it.
"We recognise in others that which we know most deeply within ourselves."
- Robert Fripp
Neither you or I have experienced the true Rolling Stones live in concert. Deal with your denial.
Best post ever.Re: Stones - Entertainment for all your family
Posted by:
His Majesty
()
Date: June 6, 2013 09:43
Quote
kleermakerQuote
His MajestyQuote
kleermakerQuote
His MajestyQuote
kleermakerQuote
His MajestyQuote
kleermaker
It all begun with the stadium rock. The beginning of the inevitable end. The last true Stones concert (not a show) took place in October 1973.
The last full and true Rolling Stones concert took place in Apostolos Nikolaidis Stadium, Athens, Greece on 17th April 1967.
Additional session musicians onstage and a replacement guitarist is not true stones. >
Well, then we must go back to 1969.
Those concerts until 69 were for screaming young teen girls and fighting teen boys with too much testosterone.
1969 still has the problem of the missing, kick starting Rolling Stones founding member.
Despite, but also because of the screaming girls and testosterone loaded boys, The Rolling Stones provided exciting, engaging music onstage. Lovely mass sing along on Ruby Tuesday as well during that 1967 tour.
A true live Rolling Stones experience, not one brought about through the aid of gifted, but essentially hired people.
This comment speaks for itself: rancour. Well, deal with it.
"We recognise in others that which we know most deeply within ourselves."
- Robert Fripp
Neither you or I have experienced the true Rolling Stones live in concert. Deal with your denial.
Not really, but I am not in denial of the fact I haven't seen the true Rolling Stones.
Re: Stones - Entertainment for all your family
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: June 6, 2013 13:10
Quote
Torres
Hi,
This is my 1st post on this forum, although I've been following it since the late 90's.
Some recent posts about the guest artists, namely from posters saying how their teenage daughters enjoyed them, made me think about how the latest Stones shows are made as an entertaining all-family events.
Since there are 2-3 generations present among the audience, the Stones want to please all, in some way. So the general fans get the usual show, the teens get their heroes, and the die-hards like many here get Mick Taylor. In the end there's a good mix of entertainment, some good moments, and everybody walks out happy, and for many here, that's the point of the show.
This kind of entertainment reminds me of plastic Hollywood movies we get all the time. You get the romantic part for the girls, you get the funny part, the action and some racy scenes for their boyfriends, in the end it's all a bit superficial, you eat popcorn and come out saying that it was a good time.
The common denominator here for me is the lack of an artistic component. To go on like this now, for the sake of pure entertainment, can only mean that either they consciously discard the importance of a legacy and do what it takes to maintain themselves popular to big masses, or that they were never so much aware of their cultural dimension in the 60s, 70s and early 80s. And I believe this heritage is being affected by these shows with their "diversity", even more than during the 00s shows.
Unlike some fans here, I'm the 1st to admit that since I became a fan (the same late 90s), I'm not so much interested in the band as I used to be. During the latest years I got a lot into jazz music, and Miles Davis became one of my biggest heroes. To give his example, he explored his art until the very end, always looking to innovate, to create, finding his way through the contemporary sounds. Sometimes I find myself thinking what would Miles be doing today in terms of music, if he was still alive. One thing is for sure: He wouldn't be giving concerts just playing his old catalogue, with some American Idol kids (specially white, but that's another story).
I have the deepest respect for true artists, and for the richness they give us through their work. The Stones gave so much, in their own way, that now I feel it's a pity to insist in these "please-all" kind of attitude.
Once in a while people here discuss that those who went to the concerts had a great time, and that's want counts. In the end, this means that ultimately we could a have a "Rolling Stones on Ice" tour. with guests, ballerinas, you name it. It would be really entertaining, for all the family, and I bet that in the end people would say they had a great time. And they could even say every of the 600 bucks was well spent. "Amazing how Mick can ice skate at that age! Let's just be thankful that they are still rolling (sliding)!"
Sorry for the long post. I guess the "Doxarites" are starting to come out. It's the Taylor Swift effect.
Torres
Don't be sorry...
A damn fine description of the phenomenon we are wittnessing... I was just reading ROLLING STONE's list of ten features of bad rock star behaviour (or what it was called), and now reading your stuff here made me think that the phenomenon you are describing here is like an ideal example of a perfect rock and roll show these days according to their taste. A common feature being that all the challenging and 'dangerous' elements are thrown out from the package.
I haven't recently reflected the phenomenon from a bird's perspective (or tried to keep that out of mind), but been more concerned on details, gig by gig, and thought that the time to go back for to more general perspective - how does this all look in a bigger picture - will be in future, when the tour is history. Of course, my stance is in a par with yours.
I especially feel connected to your idea that the "common deminator" being "a lack of an artistic compotent" - I guess that's sumps up the reasons for my "complaints" for years here. For me the reason to dig this band comes from getting artistic pleasure, and I feel rather dissatisfied in that sense. I like going to see the band once in a while - like soon to Hyde Park - and I know what I am going to get: it will be just having a good time, once again enjoying the presence of these legends and same setlist of hits. Will there be Taylor or not, I don't actually care. I don't even care if they play 'good' or 'bad' - from an artistic point of view, that doesn't really matter, since there is not that factor. And I don't even believe that there is a chance for that factor any longer - it is just "entertainment". I will leave my brains out, and just enjoy myself. In my book, £95 is an alright sum for that.
Anyway that's my tactics to cope with the phenomenon you described wonderfully.
I hope to hear more from you in future.
- Doxa
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2013-06-06 13:26 by Doxa.
Re: Stones - Entertainment for all your family
Posted by:
1962
()
Date: June 6, 2013 13:31
Rock'n'roll has always been entertainment (even in the 60's or the 70's)
Entertainment is art.
The Rolling Stones are the all time greatest artists of rock'n'roll
Entertainment is art.
The Rolling Stones are the all time greatest artists of rock'n'roll
Re: Stones - Entertainment for all your family
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: June 6, 2013 13:36
Quote
1962
Rock'n'roll has always been entertainment (even in the 60's or the 70's)
Entertainment is art.
The Rolling Stones are the all time greatest artists of rock'n'roll
I don't believe you. There are many finer distinctions.
- Doxa
Re: Stones - Entertainment for all your family
Posted by:
1962
()
Date: June 6, 2013 13:44
Part of their greatness is that they never took themselves too seriously - but this is the opposite of some "serious" fans.
Re: Stones - Entertainment for all your family
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: June 6, 2013 13:46
Actually I think the sad outcome of all these Vegas years have been that people really start believing that it has always been the same. Just "entertainment", Vegas all the same. I don't think the Stones are the only factors here - it is more like the whole rock culture coming to a mature or senior age - but I think the Stones and their audiences are a prime example of it. But gladly there are people liek Bob Dylan of the old generation who not think alike.
- Doxa
- Doxa
Re: Stones - Entertainment for all your family
Posted by:
1962
()
Date: June 6, 2013 13:50
Quote
Doxa
Actually I think the sad outcome of all these Vegas years have been that people really start believing that it has always been the same. Just "entertainment", Vegas all the same. I don't think the Stones are the only factors here - it is more like the whole rock culture coming to a mature or senior age - but I think the Stones and their audiences are a prime example of it. But gladly there are people liek Bob Dylan of the old generation who not think alike.
- Doxa
But those usually are sooo booooring.
I love Dylan, but the "Vegas" Stones shows are far better then Dylan's "serious" live shows. The same with others
Re: Stones - Entertainment for all your family
Posted by:
andrewt
()
Date: June 6, 2013 14:07
Quote
1962Quote
Doxa
Actually I think the sad outcome of all these Vegas years have been that people really start believing that it has always been the same. Just "entertainment", Vegas all the same. I don't think the Stones are the only factors here - it is more like the whole rock culture coming to a mature or senior age - but I think the Stones and their audiences are a prime example of it. But gladly there are people liek Bob Dylan of the old generation who not think alike.
- Doxa
But those usually are sooo booooring.
I love Dylan, but the "Vegas" Stones shows are far better then Dylan's "serious" live shows. The same with others
And even better is Cirque De Soleil, now that's entertaining!
Re: Stones - Entertainment for all your family
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: June 6, 2013 14:10
Quote
1962
Part of their greatness is that they never took themselves too seriously - but this is the opposite of some "serious" fans.
I am sure they are very serious about what they do. The thing is more like if one having an artistic curiosity, being inspired of something - a touch of muse - a will to take riskies, etc. The greatness of the Stones used to be that they had a very curious mind, damn strong self-security, and an ability to look forward, and not leave to enjoy the achieved results. When the thing was done, all their energy put in that, they forget it, and took the next project. They are very pragmatic, and do have not have unneeded illusions of their game.
But I guess what you mean by "not taking themselves too seriously" is something like not being pretentious, or something. But I guess no any great artist is "too serious" in that sense. Does Picasso or Dylan taking themselves "too seriouly"? They do what they do, as great and so seriously they can, and it's up to critics or people in general to judge the results.
- Doxa
Re: Stones - Entertainment for all your family
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: June 6, 2013 14:25
Quote
1962Quote
Doxa
Actually I think the sad outcome of all these Vegas years have been that people really start believing that it has always been the same. Just "entertainment", Vegas all the same. I don't think the Stones are the only factors here - it is more like the whole rock culture coming to a mature or senior age - but I think the Stones and their audiences are a prime example of it. But gladly there are people liek Bob Dylan of the old generation who not think alike.
- Doxa
But those usually are sooo booooring.
I love Dylan, but the "Vegas" Stones shows are far better then Dylan's "serious" live shows. The same with others
You seem to have some kind of issue with this "serious" term. Meaning something like "not easy to stomach, not entertaining, too intellectual, too challenging, too unpreditable" or what?... For me in Dylan shows there is nothing else serious that the guy seems to be serious in what he does, but I find the shows funny, witty, challenging, unpredictable. I guess the term "entertaining" is something I don't usually connect to them. But I guess that's the reason why you prefer the Stones shows over his.
What goes for the "serious" fans, I'd like to hear what's the problem with them? That they have a mind of their own, an ability to judge what they see, and put it in words? And what's a "non-serious fan"?
- Doxa
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2013-06-06 14:28 by Doxa.
Re: Stones - Entertainment for all your family
Posted by:
rollmops
()
Date: June 6, 2013 14:32
THe rolling stones having pop artists as guests on stage doesn't amuse me. I try not to get aggravated by it. Mick Jagger has never been a hardcore rock and roll fan and it finally shows. I am going to Philly and DC shows and I hope that for those 2 shows I 'll lucky and none of those pop artists will be invited. I don't like pop, never have, never will. Others like it good for them but having it mixed in my stones music kind of sucks, really.
Rock and roll motherFvckers,
Mops
Rock and roll motherFvckers,
Mops
Re: Stones - Entertainment for all your family
Posted by:
1962
()
Date: June 6, 2013 14:33
Quote
DoxaQuote
1962Quote
Doxa
Actually I think the sad outcome of all these Vegas years have been that people really start believing that it has always been the same. Just "entertainment", Vegas all the same. I don't think the Stones are the only factors here - it is more like the whole rock culture coming to a mature or senior age - but I think the Stones and their audiences are a prime example of it. But gladly there are people liek Bob Dylan of the old generation who not think alike.
- Doxa
But those usually are sooo booooring.
I love Dylan, but the "Vegas" Stones shows are far better then Dylan's "serious" live shows. The same with others
You seem to have some kind of issue with this "serious" term. Meaning something like "not easy to stomach, not entertaining, too intellectual, too challenging, too unpreditable" or what?... For me in Dylan shows there is nothing else serious that the guy seems to be serious in what he does, but I find the shows funny, witty, challenging, unpredictable. I guess the term "entertaining" is something I don't usually connect to them. But I guess that's the reason why you prefer the Stones shows over his.
What goes for the "serious" fans, I'd like to hear what's the problem with them? That they have a mind of their own, an ability to judge what they see, and put it in words? And what's a "non-serious fan"?
- Doxa
"Serious" fans seem to enjoy nowdays Stones shows very much IMO, but they also cry about the good old days so they are VERY nostalgic in their own way. And that's a little bit boring for me.
Re: Stones - Entertainment for all your family
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: June 6, 2013 15:13
Quote
1962Quote
DoxaQuote
1962Quote
Doxa
Actually I think the sad outcome of all these Vegas years have been that people really start believing that it has always been the same. Just "entertainment", Vegas all the same. I don't think the Stones are the only factors here - it is more like the whole rock culture coming to a mature or senior age - but I think the Stones and their audiences are a prime example of it. But gladly there are people liek Bob Dylan of the old generation who not think alike.
- Doxa
But those usually are sooo booooring.
I love Dylan, but the "Vegas" Stones shows are far better then Dylan's "serious" live shows. The same with others
You seem to have some kind of issue with this "serious" term. Meaning something like "not easy to stomach, not entertaining, too intellectual, too challenging, too unpreditable" or what?... For me in Dylan shows there is nothing else serious that the guy seems to be serious in what he does, but I find the shows funny, witty, challenging, unpredictable. I guess the term "entertaining" is something I don't usually connect to them. But I guess that's the reason why you prefer the Stones shows over his.
What goes for the "serious" fans, I'd like to hear what's the problem with them? That they have a mind of their own, an ability to judge what they see, and put it in words? And what's a "non-serious fan"?
- Doxa
"Serious" fans seem to enjoy nowdays Stones shows very much IMO, but they also cry about the good old days so they are VERY nostalgic in their own way. And that's a little bit boring for me.
So basically the difference between "serious" fans and "non-serious" fans is that the former have a better understanding of the whole career of the Stones, and ability to relate the recent happenings to a bigger picture, while the latter lack that historical understanding and think what they see is the "best Stones yet" if they think anything at all?
Anyway, I can't see myself belonging to that category of "serious fans" by your definition, so this for me... you know... just theoretical talk. And not serious at all!
- Doxa
Re: Stones - Entertainment for all your family
Posted by:
Grison
()
Date: June 6, 2013 15:28
This threat again proves me that even so called long time Rolling Stones fans like DOXA (sorry to name you) and many more just don't get the fact that not only time moves on, but also the music, the culture, our aims our wishes our age and our dreams.
Somehow some of you will never understand that Woodstock turned out to be the biggest Rock and Roll Hype with big money at the end.
And do you believe that the Rolling Stones would have continued and just died of hunger and thirst for the fame to the fans? Very silly.
I still don't get it that some of you here have much better knowledge in English but still never understood/stand the lyrics or the Rolling Stones.
If you do not like the Rolling Stones anymore that is very fine with me, Rock and Roll is a family affair since 30 years already and not just in the last decade.
You seem to dream of times you have never really lived in and you blame your own live to the music which doesn't acknowledge your ongoing as a soundtrack anymore.
Be it.
For me the 50 & Counting is by far better than ABB (which had some highlights) and Licks which also had good nights, but for sure it surpasses BtB and Steel Wheels/Jungle.
The energy of these Musicians and the art of play they still have is by far not to put into words, It is pure magic.
I am happy an thankful that I am able to take the Stones as my Soundtrack during all the decades I lived. Even With my and their ups and downs.
Somehow some of you will never understand that Woodstock turned out to be the biggest Rock and Roll Hype with big money at the end.
And do you believe that the Rolling Stones would have continued and just died of hunger and thirst for the fame to the fans? Very silly.
I still don't get it that some of you here have much better knowledge in English but still never understood/stand the lyrics or the Rolling Stones.
If you do not like the Rolling Stones anymore that is very fine with me, Rock and Roll is a family affair since 30 years already and not just in the last decade.
You seem to dream of times you have never really lived in and you blame your own live to the music which doesn't acknowledge your ongoing as a soundtrack anymore.
Be it.
For me the 50 & Counting is by far better than ABB (which had some highlights) and Licks which also had good nights, but for sure it surpasses BtB and Steel Wheels/Jungle.
The energy of these Musicians and the art of play they still have is by far not to put into words, It is pure magic.
I am happy an thankful that I am able to take the Stones as my Soundtrack during all the decades I lived. Even With my and their ups and downs.
Re: Stones - Entertainment for all your family
Posted by:
1962
()
Date: June 6, 2013 15:33
Doxa, nothing wrong with "serious Stones fans" at all, I'm also in that gang, I also think that The Rolling Stones after say 1984 (in the "second half) is quite different but this "entertainment for all your family" kind of criticising is just silly. And boring.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-06-06 15:35 by 1962.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-06-06 15:35 by 1962.
Re: Stones - Entertainment for all your family
Posted by:
Kirk
()
Date: June 6, 2013 20:40
I respect all these insights (Torres, Doxa), but I have never allienated myself from them. The Stones can never be a 'subject for analysis', at least for me. I just cannot 'reduce' them to something else - art, money, entertainment, social phenomenon, whatever - in order to start thinking and talking about them as a distinct and separate entity. I know, this kills critical thinking, but I've had enough of this. I just don't need it in the Stones case! They've earned an 'All areas access' pass for my soul and mind!
Re: Stones - Entertainment for all your family
Posted by:
Rokyfan
()
Date: June 6, 2013 20:46
Quote
Grison
This threat again proves me that even so called long time Rolling Stones fans like DOXA (sorry to name you) and many more just don't get the fact that not only time moves on, but also the music, the culture, our aims our wishes our age and our dreams.
Somehow some of you will never understand that Woodstock turned out to be the biggest Rock and Roll Hype with big money at the end.
And do you believe that the Rolling Stones would have continued and just died of hunger and thirst for the fame to the fans? Very silly.
I still don't get it that some of you here have much better knowledge in English but still never understood/stand the lyrics or the Rolling Stones.
If you do not like the Rolling Stones anymore that is very fine with me, Rock and Roll is a family affair since 30 years already and not just in the last decade.
You seem to dream of times you have never really lived in and you blame your own live to the music which doesn't acknowledge your ongoing as a soundtrack anymore.
Be it.
For me the 50 & Counting is by far better than ABB (which had some highlights) and Licks which also had good nights, but for sure it surpasses BtB and Steel Wheels/Jungle.
The energy of these Musicians and the art of play they still have is by far not to put into words, It is pure magic.
I am happy an thankful that I am able to take the Stones as my Soundtrack during all the decades I lived. Even With my and their ups and downs.
Who's fighting and what for?
If we are all one, let's show it, right?
Oh, Woodstock Nation turned out to be hype? Thanks for the news.
Re: Stones - Entertainment for all your family
Posted by:
stonehearted
()
Date: June 6, 2013 21:13
Quote
Rockman
....but they wouldn't give Charlie Manson a day pass would they ???
'Fraid not, because he only provided entertainment for his family.
Re: Stones - Entertainment for all your family
Posted by:
kleermaker
()
Date: June 6, 2013 21:32
Quote
His MajestyQuote
kleermakerQuote
His MajestyQuote
kleermakerQuote
His MajestyQuote
kleermakerQuote
His MajestyQuote
kleermaker
It all begun with the stadium rock. The beginning of the inevitable end. The last true Stones concert (not a show) took place in October 1973.
The last full and true Rolling Stones concert took place in Apostolos Nikolaidis Stadium, Athens, Greece on 17th April 1967.
Additional session musicians onstage and a replacement guitarist is not true stones. >
Well, then we must go back to 1969.
Those concerts until 69 were for screaming young teen girls and fighting teen boys with too much testosterone.
1969 still has the problem of the missing, kick starting Rolling Stones founding member.
Despite, but also because of the screaming girls and testosterone loaded boys, The Rolling Stones provided exciting, engaging music onstage. Lovely mass sing along on Ruby Tuesday as well during that 1967 tour.
A true live Rolling Stones experience, not one brought about through the aid of gifted, but essentially hired people.
This comment speaks for itself: rancour. Well, deal with it.
"We recognise in others that which we know most deeply within ourselves."
- Robert Fripp
Neither you or I have experienced the true Rolling Stones live in concert. Deal with your denial.
Not really, but I am not in denial of the fact I haven't seen the true Rolling Stones.
If I had the choice to choose to see the 'true' Rolling Stones I would always choose the version of the band that I've seen. To me the best band ever to be on stage. At the brink of the end of an era they still mattered in many ways, that is socially, musically, artistically and culturally.
Re: Stones - Entertainment for all your family
Posted by:
Torres
()
Date: June 6, 2013 23:54
Quote
Grison
This threat again proves me that even so called long time Rolling Stones fans like DOXA (sorry to name you) and many more just don't get the fact that not only time moves on, but also the music, the culture, our aims our wishes our age and our dreams.
Somehow some of you will never understand that Woodstock turned out to be the biggest Rock and Roll Hype with big money at the end.
And do you believe that the Rolling Stones would have continued and just died of hunger and thirst for the fame to the fans? Very silly.
I still don't get it that some of you here have much better knowledge in English but still never understood/stand the lyrics or the Rolling Stones.
If you do not like the Rolling Stones anymore that is very fine with me, Rock and Roll is a family affair since 30 years already and not just in the last decade.
You seem to dream of times you have never really lived in and you blame your own live to the music which doesn't acknowledge your ongoing as a soundtrack anymore.
Be it.
For me the 50 & Counting is by far better than ABB (which had some highlights) and Licks which also had good nights, but for sure it surpasses BtB and Steel Wheels/Jungle.
The energy of these Musicians and the art of play they still have is by far not to put into words, It is pure magic.
I am happy an thankful that I am able to take the Stones as my Soundtrack during all the decades I lived. Even With my and their ups and downs.
I always found curious, in a genuine away, this kind of feelings posted here, which I admit are pretty much opposed to my own current perspective about the band. This is loving the band no matter what, a faithful position for all the good moments through life. I totally respect that, yet I think the "time moving on" argument is more like an excuse to maintain this fidelity at any cost. Somewhat like a religious belief.
Well I like freedom of sight. And call it business, not taking themselves seriously, whatever, but the Stones had a delicious, bigger than life dimension, even when they tried to act serious. The candid image of Ronnie staring at the camera in the SMU video for me is such a beautiful example of that. The entertainment was crazy, risky, provocative. It had real substance, something that will stand through time. Sure it was something from another era, things are done differently today. But I think the Stones don't belong to today's way of making mass entertainment. They risk going from immortality to becoming mere mortals. Usually it's the opposite way.
Imagine if all the Doors members were still alive and the band was still playing, with guests, repeating the same setlists. Imagine Jimi Hendrix. Imagine the Beatles, doing a Yellow Submarine tour, with guests, a Cirque du Soleil special.
Imagine Abba, who refuse to reunite, to many fans sadness. They would sell out night after night after night... For the sake of?
Still alive or alreay past this world, for me the artists I mentioned have this in common: they are immortals. And we all need immortals to admire. For me the Stones still belong in that category. But they shouldn't take it for granted.
Torres
Re: Stones - Entertainment for all your family
Posted by:
His Majesty
()
Date: June 7, 2013 00:28
Quote
kleermaker
If I had the choice to choose to see the 'true' Rolling Stones I would always choose the version of the band that I've seen. To me the best band ever to be on stage. At the brink of the end of an era they still mattered in many ways, that is socially, musically, artistically and culturally.
You missed the real thing, no choice available after the 1967 European Tour.
This other waffle, which can be argued about, is just a way for you to add more credence to something you deem to be the best. Best band ever onstage? Considering all of the live music that has happened, you deem a 1973 Taylor widdle fest to be the best ever? Lol!
Re: Stones - Entertainment for all your family
Posted by:
Kirk
()
Date: June 7, 2013 01:06
They risk going from immortality to becoming mere mortals. Torres
Now this is a very interesting statement!!
Now this is a very interesting statement!!
Re: Stones - Entertainment for all your family
Posted by:
lem motlow
()
Date: June 7, 2013 01:07
the stones are exactly what they were in 1962 and 1969 and 75 and every other year they've ever played.
i hate to break it to some of the folks who thought something more was happening than music but guess what,it wasn't.
i'm sure back in the 1960s it had a real deep meaning to people but it all added up to one thing.and that one thing is the same today-a working band playing music and getting paid.
i hate to break it to some of the folks who thought something more was happening than music but guess what,it wasn't.
i'm sure back in the 1960s it had a real deep meaning to people but it all added up to one thing.and that one thing is the same today-a working band playing music and getting paid.
Re: Stones - Entertainment for all your family
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: June 7, 2013 01:09
Quote
lem motlow
the stones are exactly what they were in 1962 and 1969 and 75 and every other year they've ever played.
i hate to break it to some of the folks who thought something more was happening than music but guess what,it wasn't.
i'm sure back in the 1960s it had a real deep meaning to people but it all added up to one thing.and that one thing is the same today-a working band playing music and getting paid.
you're no fun at all
Re: Stones - Entertainment for all your family
Posted by:
Max'sKansasCity
()
Date: June 7, 2013 01:20
Quote
StonesTodQuote
lem motlow
the stones are exactly what they were in 1962 and 1969 and 75 and every other year they've ever played.
i hate to break it to some of the folks who thought something more was happening than music but guess what,it wasn't.
i'm sure back in the 1960s it had a real deep meaning to people but it all added up to one thing.and that one thing is the same today-a working band playing music and getting paid.
you're no fun at all
He may not be fun, but he is correct.
It is all much more simple than many want to make it.
Re: Stones - Entertainment for all your family
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: June 7, 2013 01:22
Quote
Max'sKansasCityQuote
StonesTodQuote
lem motlow
the stones are exactly what they were in 1962 and 1969 and 75 and every other year they've ever played.
i hate to break it to some of the folks who thought something more was happening than music but guess what,it wasn't.
i'm sure back in the 1960s it had a real deep meaning to people but it all added up to one thing.and that one thing is the same today-a working band playing music and getting paid.
you're no fun at all
He may not be fun, but he is correct.
It is all much more simple than many want to make it.
what we're seeking is fun PLUS simple....the search continues....
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
Bashlets , BeastyBurdeny , damerefugio , Dan , Eleanor Rigby , gaizoku , Happy Jack , hot stuff , jmd , Milan , NICOS , spikenyc
Guests:
1642
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10