Tell Me :
Talk
they're returning to their roots - their first years were as a cover band as well :-)
ROCKMAN
you found stonestod?
Is he "witching" for material???? Genius, best idea ever!
They had more new, self-composed songs on the 2013-tour than on their 63/64-tours
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Early / Mid /Late Eras - How Do We Define?
Posted by:
His Majesty
()
Date: July 16, 2013 01:29
Essentially it's been 1 year or so as a full on cover band and then 50 years of the stones functioning as a band to help arrange, play and record Jagger & Richards songs.
Re: Early / Mid /Late Eras - How Do We Define?
Posted by:
NICOS
()
Date: July 16, 2013 01:45
Early / Mid /Late Eras - How Do We Define?
50 years of great music ----------with up's and downs...........in record counting most were up.........in years counting most were down ( they released 5 new studio records since 1983 (that's 5 records in 30 years))
__________________________
50 years of great music ----------with up's and downs...........in record counting most were up.........in years counting most were down ( they released 5 new studio records since 1983 (that's 5 records in 30 years))
__________________________
Re: Early / Mid /Late Eras - How Do We Define?
Posted by:
ryanpow
()
Date: July 16, 2013 03:17
I thi
nk
I think they did their best stuff during the Charlie Watts years.
nk
I think they did their best stuff during the Charlie Watts years.
Re: Early / Mid /Late Eras - How Do We Define?
Posted by:
sonomastone
()
Date: July 16, 2013 12:09
Quote
His Majesty
Essentially it's been 1 year or so as a full on cover band and then 50 years of the stones functioning as a band to help arrange, play and record Jagger & Richards songs.
they're returning to their roots - their first years were as a cover band as well :-)
Re: Early / Mid /Late Eras - How Do We Define?
Posted by:
Rockman
()
Date: July 16, 2013 12:36
ROCKMAN
Re: Early / Mid /Late Eras - How Do We Define?
Posted by:
sonomastone
()
Date: July 16, 2013 12:41
Quote
Rockman
you found stonestod?
Re: Early / Mid /Late Eras - How Do We Define?
Posted by:
Thrylan
()
Date: July 16, 2013 13:01
Quote
sonomastoneQuote
Rockman
you found stonestod?
Is he "witching" for material???? Genius, best idea ever!
Re: Early / Mid /Late Eras - How Do We Define?
Posted by:
His Majesty
()
Date: July 16, 2013 13:24
^ Best twiglets ever!
Re: Early / Mid /Late Eras - How Do We Define?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: July 16, 2013 13:28
Quote
sonomastoneQuote
His Majesty
Essentially it's been 1 year or so as a full on cover band and then 50 years of the stones functioning as a band to help arrange, play and record Jagger & Richards songs.
they're returning to their roots - their first years were as a cover band as well :-)
They had more new, self-composed songs on the 2013-tour than on their 63/64-tours
Re: Early / Mid /Late Eras - How Do We Define?
Posted by:
buttons67
()
Date: July 16, 2013 19:41
ive asked this question before about how we break up the years.
ive always wondered myself what era to put each year in.
i disagree with the 3 way split of 17 years because effectively the goalposts would move as time moves, so in 3 years time we would be talking about 3 sets of 18 years, thus moving the first set on a year.
i would split each era as such.
1962-67. the brian jones era, the early era,the experimantal era, when the live setlist was relevant.
that era could be broken up into various components as the band seemed to redefine themselves every 18 months or so.
next its the 1968-74 era, the mick taylor years, the setlists being almost the same every night for a particular tour, the classic mid 60,s period of the band being ignored, but the band at the peak when it came to live performances.
next 1976-86 not quite the silver or golden era but great all the same, the early ronnie wood years, still touring and making decent albums and some great records.
next is what a lot of folk call the vegas era, or the stones tribute band era
1989-present. not a lot in the way of new material, around 100 songs, but only fit onto 4 albums, they could have put the same amount of songs on 10 albums and beefed it up with cover versions. different sort of tours, old songs and previously never played songs revived, setlists mainly the reason they are classed as being thier own tribute band but still great to have them around touring and making records.
long may it continue.
ive always wondered myself what era to put each year in.
i disagree with the 3 way split of 17 years because effectively the goalposts would move as time moves, so in 3 years time we would be talking about 3 sets of 18 years, thus moving the first set on a year.
i would split each era as such.
1962-67. the brian jones era, the early era,the experimantal era, when the live setlist was relevant.
that era could be broken up into various components as the band seemed to redefine themselves every 18 months or so.
next its the 1968-74 era, the mick taylor years, the setlists being almost the same every night for a particular tour, the classic mid 60,s period of the band being ignored, but the band at the peak when it came to live performances.
next 1976-86 not quite the silver or golden era but great all the same, the early ronnie wood years, still touring and making decent albums and some great records.
next is what a lot of folk call the vegas era, or the stones tribute band era
1989-present. not a lot in the way of new material, around 100 songs, but only fit onto 4 albums, they could have put the same amount of songs on 10 albums and beefed it up with cover versions. different sort of tours, old songs and previously never played songs revived, setlists mainly the reason they are classed as being thier own tribute band but still great to have them around touring and making records.
long may it continue.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.