There is no reason for it. In a week from now, Deep Purple will release their new album. It doesn´t bode too well. 3 out of 5 stars seems to be the verdict, judging from signals on the net so far. I really don`t buy the absence of Blackmore and Lord explanation.

Quote
noughties
There is no reason for it. In a week from now, Deep Purple will release their new album. It doesn´t bode too well. 3 out of 5 stars seems to be the verdict, judging from signals on the net so far. I really don`t buy the absence of Blackmore and Lord explanation.

I'm sure when you think this through, you'll find that there is indeed a reason for it..

I believe Jon Lord has passed away

Because they're older/too old.

Cause they are old and have less hunger and creativity to truly make something great anymore. It would most likely still not be great if Blackmore and Lord were there. Its insanely rare that these veteran rockers actually put out great albums later into their career. Particularly the ones that are loud rock based like The Who or something. Kinda easier for someone like Leonard Cohen or Bob Dylan to still do something great. How genuinely creative would most of us be at 60? Most of these guys had an unbelievable run of creativity to last a lifetime in their 20s. Deep Purple should be thankful to get 3 stars.

Because they've gotten older and they're less creative and inspired and they can't play as well.

It´s because all of them stopped doing drugs.
But there´s no Rock n Roll without drugs. It can´t be.
Don´t expect a flower to bloom without water.

Drugs lifted them to achieve their creative peak. Without drugs it´s always three steps below the peak. I can´t think of any so-called masterpiece in rock music without drugs being involved, is there any?

Zappa

Dave Davies has a new album out today. It has sweet moments but I must admit the Davies brothers do not sound great in 2017. Tough to get old.

A lot of artists only have a finite amount of creativity in the tank.

Also, I wonder how many artists, particularly rock'n'rollers, still FEEL the music they perform as they age? How much of it is keeping up their image to please a fanbase? How many of them would really like to do something different, but feel hamstrung by their past?

That's why I respect Robert Plant...that guy truly does what he wants, and it shows...even if you don't dig his softer sound, it's awesome that he refuses to pretend it's still 1977.

For a lot of metal bands, I imagine they need to fake a lot of their anger and aggression. How much angry young man energy can you really muster when you're a 53-year old multimillionaire with a wife and teenagers?

Quote
keefriff99
That's why I respect Robert Plant...that guy truly does what he wants, and it shows...even if you don't dig his softer sound, it's awesome that he refuses to pretend it's still 1977.

Agreed. He may go out and play mostly Zep stuff live, but the man won a Grammy for his Allison Krauss album then turned down a Zep reunion to do another one of those in 2008. May not be my bag, but he's doing his own thing, at least studio wise, and I'm sure he's more fulfilled than most rockers his age doing stuff he actually cares about and is new and fresh.

Quote
HMS
It´s because all of them stopped doing drugs.
But there´s no Rock n Roll without drugs. It can´t be.
Don´t expect a flower to bloom without water.

Drugs lifted them to achieve their creative peak. Without drugs it´s always three steps below the peak. I can´t think of any so-called masterpiece in rock music without drugs being involved, is there any?

Anything Springsteen did, he only admits to a little drinking in his autobio. Zappa was mentioned, though he was a caffeine and nicotine addict. I don't believe Jeff Beck was into drugs, which may explain why he's still around at full power. I believe it was Grace Slick who said drugs inspire you at first, and then tear you down.

Quote
HMS
It´s because all of them stopped doing drugs.
But there´s no Rock n Roll without drugs. It can´t be.
Don´t expect a flower to bloom without water.

Drugs lifted them to achieve their creative peak. Without drugs it´s always three steps below the peak. I can´t think of any so-called masterpiece in rock music without drugs being involved, is there any?

Really?......Really?

Quote
keefriff99
Also, I wonder how many artists, particularly rock'n'rollers, still FEEL the music they perform as they age? How much of it is keeping up their image to please a fanbase? How many of them would really like to do something different, but feel hamstrung by their past?

Reminds me of a certain 73 year old multi-zillionaire whose had multiple wives and girlfriends, and who also happens to be a Great Grandfather, singing 'oldies' like Start Me Up and Satisfaction.
He'd probably rather be a succesful actor or hanging with and accepted by a hipper/younger crowd i.e. Taylor Swift, Will.I.Am, Justin Timberlake, etc.

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

Quote
HMS
It´s because all of them stopped doing drugs.
But there´s no Rock n Roll without drugs. It can´t be.
Don´t expect a flower to bloom without water.

Drugs lifted them to achieve their creative peak. Without drugs it´s always three steps below the peak. I can´t think of any so-called masterpiece in rock music without drugs being involved, is there any?

What an ignorant statement.

Why? Seriously?? Are you kidding???

Common sense tells you it is a matter of age. Creativity, motivation, priorities, angst, they all wilt, just like everything else in life. The fruitful years are far back in the rear view mirror. Most of the veteran rockers simply cannot sing, play, move like they could 40-50 years ago. Mick is a rare exception in terms of stage performance. He is like Peter Pan! Kudos to them all for still playing and touring, but their playing, writing, and vocal skills have greatly diminished. That's the way of the world. Deal with it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-03-31 20:27 by DaveG.

Rock and Roll itself has wilted IMO. In say 1972 rock music was the dominant music of popular culture. It's just a pale shadow of what it once was. I still respect the great canon of music that Rock and Roll has given us. But it's hard to get excited about new Rock and Roll music.

To me it seems we are in the "mish-mash" era of music. I don't know what a typical 20-year-old listens to but I suspect that it is a mish-mash of all sorts of stuff.

The sun is setting on Rock and Roll.

Even The Rolling Stones today are a caricature of what they were in 1972, although a good one.

Quote
keefriff99


For a lot of metal bands, I imagine they need to fake a lot of their anger and aggression. How much angry young man energy can you really muster when you're a 53-year old multimillionaire with a wife and teenagers?

You sound like you could do with the new power trip album. Out now on southern lord.
Dont miss it

Quote
Cooltoplady

Quote
HMS
It´s because all of them stopped doing drugs.
But there´s no Rock n Roll without drugs. It can´t be.
Don´t expect a flower to bloom without water.

Drugs lifted them to achieve their creative peak. Without drugs it´s always three steps below the peak. I can´t think of any so-called masterpiece in rock music without drugs being involved, is there any?

What an ignorant statement.

"Sex, drugs & Rock n Roll" - Only a fairytale?

It must be one of the mysteries of the world, why do people , musicians loose their creativity. Writers don't, they can go on into their 70's delivering some of their best work. Personally where music is concerned i put it down to musicians either stopping drugs or the drugs stop working. Most of the best stuff comes from the 60's and 70's when people were experimenting with all kinds of mind expanding drugs. I actually wonder if drugs are just shit these days lol. Keith said in 98' he tried Heroin again and it just didn't work for him like it used to, he said he thought drugs were lousy these days, who knows.
The other consideration is when people mature and become relaxed in their own skin, they seem to lose something creatively, when people are falling in and out of love when they are younger it seems to inspire creativity. Being married with three children in a stable relationship seems to diminish the insecurity which can sometimes drive people to do amazing things. Also proving ones self, ones hunger for stardom and all the goodies that come with it are no longer desired when fame is achieved. Sorry i'm rambling now.

Without exception, rock musicians reach their creative peak when they're in their late 20s. By the time they've reached their mid-30s, their inspiration has completely vanished. Competence and professionalism are all that remain. Why? I have no idea. That's just the way it is. You can play rock music at any age, but you can only create great rock music when you're young.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2017-03-31 21:52 by tatters.

Quote
tatters
Without exception, rock musicians reach their creative peak when they're in their late 20s. By their mid-30s, the inspiration has vanished, and only the competence and professionalism remain.

"Without exception"? That's just so bold a statement, it should keep the thread going.....

Quote
stone4ever
It must be one of the mysteries of the world, why do people , musicians loose their creativity. Writers don't, they can go on into their 70's delivering some of their best work. Personally where music is concerned i put it down to musicians either stopping drugs or the drugs stop working. Most of the best stuff comes from the 60's and 70's when people were experimenting with all kinds of mind expanding drugs. I actually wonder if drugs are just shit these days lol. Keith said in 98' he tried Heroin again and it just didn't work for him like it used to, he said he thought drugs were lousy these days, who knows.
The other consideration is when people mature and become relaxed in their own skin, they seem to lose something creatively, when people are falling in and out of love when they are younger it seems to inspire creativity. Being married with three children in a stable relationship seems to diminish the insecurity which can sometimes drive people to do amazing things. Also proving ones self, ones hunger for stardom and all the goodies that come with it are no longer desired when fame is achieved. Sorry i'm rambling now.

Ranmble on stone4ever... As long as you're thinking, you're still brainstorming! And I'd have to give your brainstorming points for at least being plausible and probable.

One thought I'll add is the fact that, a young, new musician generally doesn't have enough experience/outside influences to start second guessing themselves. They are in the moment and they do what they like and enjoy and it is what it is. Their heart and soul are calling the shots. One time that ignorance truly can be bliss for all involved.

With every day/week/month/year that passes, that same musician is hearing more music, listening to more opinions, gaining new influences. As time goes on the balance in the creative process changes from heart/soul in the drivers seat to brain in the drivers seat. 2nd guessing. Revising. Editing. Outside opinions.

Peace,
Mr DJA

Quote
mr_dja

Quote
stone4ever
It must be one of the mysteries of the world, why do people , musicians loose their creativity. Writers don't, they can go on into their 70's delivering some of their best work. Personally where music is concerned i put it down to musicians either stopping drugs or the drugs stop working. Most of the best stuff comes from the 60's and 70's when people were experimenting with all kinds of mind expanding drugs. I actually wonder if drugs are just shit these days lol. Keith said in 98' he tried Heroin again and it just didn't work for him like it used to, he said he thought drugs were lousy these days, who knows.
The other consideration is when people mature and become relaxed in their own skin, they seem to lose something creatively, when people are falling in and out of love when they are younger it seems to inspire creativity. Being married with three children in a stable relationship seems to diminish the insecurity which can sometimes drive people to do amazing things. Also proving ones self, ones hunger for stardom and all the goodies that come with it are no longer desired when fame is achieved. Sorry i'm rambling now.

Ranmble on stone4ever... As long as you're thinking, you're still brainstorming! And I'd have to give your brainstorming points for at least being plausible and probable.

One thought I'll add is the fact that, a young, new musician generally doesn't have enough experience/outside influences to start second guessing themselves. They are in the moment and they do what they like and enjoy and it is what it is. Their heart and soul are calling the shots. One time that ignorance truly can be bliss for all involved.

With every day/week/month/year that passes, that same musician is hearing more music, listening to more opinions, gaining new influences. As time goes on the balance in the creative process changes from heart/soul in the drivers seat to brain in the drivers seat. 2nd guessing. Revising. Editing. Outside opinions.

Peace,
Mr DJA

Absolutely, the other thing to consider i guess is when people become successful the EGO comes into play, do i need this band ? can i make it on my own ? i don't like sharing record royalties, i want to go in another musical direction to my co writers, these guys are holding me back, should i branch out into solo stardom. Once the ego comes into play the demons take over.

How ironic: I'm reading this thread and listening to music through my TV, and Time is On My Side just came on!

You can't expect musicians in their 70'ies to play as they did in their 20'ies-50'ies. Look at Eric Clapton, Stones, Macca, Roger Waters... they change style as to compensate for their less ability to sing and play (guitar, keyboard and drums). I guess a bass player can keep the same style much longer.

Just saw Eric Clapton in MSG this month and he has changed to a more comfortable style. He cannot pull off the same kind of lead solos as he did just 10 years ago and his voice isn't as flexible as it used to be .. the age factor. Same with Stones, Deep Purple, Macca.... etc.

Should they then stop playing music!! No. I am happy they are still around because they are the ones that still can play music, even if it is on a more limited level.

Recording new albums. Most bands have their peak years the first 10 years, if they are lucky enough.

Afterwards, it is downhill and in comfy zone. But, should they stop producing music!! No.

I don't think it's only that. Time has moved on. Rock and roll, or even pop, isn't the novelty it used to be. And we, the listeners, have turned old too. Of course.

Chuck Berry is a good case to point.
Currently been lauded of course...but then...no new material for 38 years. The Stones are prolific in contrast to dear ol' Chuck. Little Richard and Fats Domino the same.

Rock is a pretty limited art form and many of its musicians don't have the musical abilities to extend their 'craft'. They probably aren't that bothered as long as the punters boost their bank balances.
Compare that to many jazzers and classical guys.

I think that's one of the reasons Mick got involved in films....a much more challenging and at this time of his life satisfying creative outlet.

Quote
schillid
Zappa

Zappa the tight-arsed dude who never came up with a piece of music worth remembering?
Zappa the guy who in the 80's worked closely with the FBI to find the perpetrator of a bootleg boxset of live tapes. A bootleg boxset which was said to be better than the official "You Can't Do That Onstage" series...

Frank should have lit up a fat one!