Quote
georgelicks

Quote
Hairball

True about Elvis in his later years, though I never thought that about the Stones. But without a new album of original material in 14 years, and live concerts w/95% of the setlist over 40 years old, kind of makes you wonder.

It's the opposite actually, the Stones reputation started to grow up during the last 10 years or so, once the band stopped publishing new music.

Their old catalog is much stronger now, their hits collections are always on the albums chart, their streaming numbers for stuff until 1981 are great too, it wasn't like that 15 or 20 years ago, the band knows it and that's one of the big reasons for almost no new stuff during the last 15 years, sadly for a band like the Stones a new album is damage to the history.

A cover album like B&L was new stuff from the Stones, though. And the Grammy and selling 2 million copies gave them a boost as well.

The revival of Pepper-era Beatles cemented the idea of the Stones fan as a neanderthal who worship a bunch of macho hedonistic really old rock n rollers to the point of even wearing t-shirts from the 1981 tour that was sponsored by Budweiser. That image started to crumble during the 90s when Exile became the new blueprint. I guess things changed around 1995 or 1997.

ironically the stones 1967 era of buttons and majesties combined with unofficial outtakes show an energy, aggression and passion that the beatles never had.

1967 stones are so underrated, as 1967 beatles were always overrated.

sorry to bash the beatles again, but how they escape criticism for many songs surprises me.

Quote
buttons67
ironically the stones 1967 era of buttons and majesties combined with unofficial outtakes show an energy, aggression and passion that the beatles never had.

1967 stones are so underrated, as 1967 beatles were always overrated.

sorry to bash the beatles again, but how they escape criticism for many songs surprises me.

I agree about the 66-67 Stones. I love this period.

"No Anchovies, Please"

Next album and next tour : Angus, Stevie, Brian, Phil and...

Quote
SKILLS
AC/DC were climbing after the Grammy appearance in 2015, but now without Malcolm and Brian i believe it's over.....

unless...

They recruit Sebastian Bach, it's all in his range, he still looks great, has a couple of his bands songs that could be interesting with Angus propelling them and has Sex appeal for the ladies of AC/DC Fandom, Dudes respect and he can rock.

***
I'm just a Bad Boy Boogie

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
bitusa2012

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
bitusa2012

Quote
tomk
The band Journey's stature has skyrocketed, more than I ever thought. Every dumb Millennial knows that stuff, and loves it.
The Beatles will always be there, on top.
Zeppelin, too.
As for the Stones, I think the general public doesn't care what they do anymore, and it's been that way for quite a while. Sell out a stadium, yeah, but besides us, nobody cares what whey do anymore.

Journey? Surely you jest. Honestly I cannot recall a single track of theirs KNOWING I have heard them.

Clearly you live under a very big rock.

Well I just went to Spotify and played Send her my Love, wheel in the Sky, Don't Stop beleivin', who's Crying Now, Only the Young, Be Good to Yourself,Lights, Ask the Lonely, Feelin' that Way, Open Arms, and a few others.

Can you point me in the direction of a song I might have heard from this band who's reputation has skyrocketed???

I think Journey were huge in the US. They never made much impact in Europe, I believe? However, it's unavoidable not to notice a band that sold 100 million albums..

Love Neal Schon for his work with Santana. Not so much in Journey..

They are huge in the US. They have been since the early 1980s. They continue to tour and produce records.

bitusa2012, you must not live in the US if you don't know anything about Journey.

The first group that comes to mind is U2. It seems that their albums and tours are no longer cultural appointments. I suppose the same could be true about the Stones, in terms of stature among younger generations, in comparing, for example, the craze for Stones tickets in '72 or even '81 vs. now.

But of course, I would say the Stones stature is quite secure, being an obsessed fan and all, but trying to step outside of that....I can see how "kids today" don't get nearly as excited about them and what they're currently doing.

But anyway, for me, U2's stature has definitely lessened over time. Same with Led Zeppelin, The Who and Aerosmith......and yep, even the Beatles. Used to listen to them a lot as a kid and young adult, but now very very rarely.....though the kids like to hear 'Yellow Submarine".....so I see a trend there.

Quote
georgelicks

Quote
Hairball

True about Elvis in his later years, though I never thought that about the Stones. But without a new album of original material in 14 years, and live concerts w/95% of the setlist over 40 years old, kind of makes you wonder.

It's the opposite actually, the Stones reputation started to grow up during the last 10 years or so, once the band stopped publishing new music.

Their old catalog is much stronger now, their hits collections are always on the albums chart, their streaming numbers for stuff until 1981 are great too, it wasn't like that 15 or 20 years ago, the band knows it and that's one of the big reasons for almost no new stuff during the last 15 years, sadly for a band like the Stones a new album is damage to the history.

It's why The Beatles and Led Zeppelin will always be bigger - they went away, their legacy is intact. The Stones have been around far too long in that regard, they've been battling their legacy since 1989 or so, although once they stop no one will really talk about anything post-1981 other than 2 things - the money they made and how old they were.

Quote
Shawn20
Three Dog Night was never considered a cool band - even in their salad days. But damn, they had some great songs and their harmonies were tight. I'm a fan!!

Saw them in 1979 when they still had it going on and the original members. Agree on the harmonies.

Mike


[www.flickr.com]

Good point about U2.

Quote
Elmo Lewis
Good point about U2.

Yes, I used to love U2, now cant stomach anything they have made in 30 years. Same with REM. But the RAMONES are now much more regarded than in the 70s. They've reached classic rock status



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-01-29 17:47 by DrPete.

CSN&Y were huge in the late 60a/early 70s. Lou Reed was pretty big.

I'd like to just observe that death plays a big part in this. Death can be a great career move!
Look at Hendrix Joplin Doors Amy Lennon Queen Jackson and many more. Sorry if anyone's offended just an observation



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2019-01-29 19:58 by exhpart.

Quote
MidnightDevilRambler

Quote
Shawn20
Three Dog Night was never considered a cool band - even in their salad days. But damn, they had some great songs and their harmonies were tight. I'm a fan!!

Saw them in 1979 when they still had it going on and the original members. Agree on the harmonies.

Just listened some on YouTube.
That stuff is very cheesy IMHO
No wonder they have been forgotten

Quote
exhpart
I'd like to just observe that death plays a big part in this. Death can be a great career move!
Look at Hendrix Joplin Doors Amy Lennon Queen Jackson and many more. Sorry if anyone's offended just an observation

Jimi Hendrix was one of the biggest acts at Monterey and no one came near Hendrix at Woodstock.

Stones:

- creativity and songwriting stopped after 75-80.
- musically topped 81 - decreased from 90-10. Grew again from 13.
- business has grown since mid seventies. However grew less after 2005 due to musical problems.....



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-01-29 20:51 by mtaylor.

In the early 70's Jethro Tull was huge, in the same league as Led Zep.

Both bands were popular, but weren't loved by critics. Zeppelin finally got a cover of Rolling Stone (after Dr. Hook!) in '75. Tull kept putting out records, but by the late 70's had pretty much faded from the airways.

Years later, their "Best Heavy Metal Album" Grammy nomination turned them into a running gag which I don't think they've ever recovered from.


Zeppelin was reviled by hipsters from the punk years on...until the mid-80's when REM producer Mitch Easter admitted to loving them. Which was a shock at the time.
That might have been the start of the shift, because a year or so later Robert Plant said something like, "I'd like to mow Mitch Easter's lawn!"

Now of course, they are loved.

Same with Black Sabbath and Queen too for that matter. At Live Aid, the only person who made a big deal about the Sabbath reunion with Ozzy was bro MTV VJ Mark Goodman. The fact that Queen got the biggest response that day was also not really discussed much. Both bands really didn't achieve hip cachet until a new generation of rockers cited them as influences.

regarding u2, loved them early to mid 80,s saw them in 1987 and was surprised the setlist contained little from the best years, thats the trend that has continued, wonder why a group as early as they did, just leave out their best work and insert in its place 7 songs from 1 album that was nowhere near as good as the first 4 albums.

i know they were trying to be contemporary, but of the 20 songs played on that joshua tree gig in glasgow, 4 songs were snippeted(as u2 are famous for) 7 were joshua tree, 4 were from the unforgettable fire and only 5 from the first 3 albums. they left out so much of the good stuff it was a disapointment as i was hoping to see a live at redrocks type concert.

never got back into u2 much after rattle and hum.

Quote
georgelicks

Quote
Hairball

True about Elvis in his later years, though I never thought that about the Stones. But without a new album of original material in 14 years, and live concerts w/95% of the setlist over 40 years old, kind of makes you wonder.

It's the opposite actually, the Stones reputation started to grow up during the last 10 years or so, once the band stopped publishing new music.

Their old catalog is much stronger now, their hits collections are always on the albums chart, their streaming numbers for stuff until 1981 are great too, it wasn't like that 15 or 20 years ago, the band knows it and that's one of the big reasons for almost no new stuff during the last 15 years, sadly for a band like the Stones a new album is damage to the history.

That explains alot...

Well hats off to the Stones then for doing next to nothing as far as original/new music goes- their legacy is what keeps them afloat.
Kind of shrewd marketing strategy, but Mick has always been business minded. Sadly for most fans, that means living in the past.
I said years ago that their future lies in their past (vault releases, greatest hits comps, etc.), but never realized how true that is - you've put it all in perspective.
Looking forward to experiencing some live nostalgia on the upcoming tour, and am no longer holding my breath for a new album (though a new single would be nice)!

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

My rule of thumb for when a band is on the
decline as far as current relevance (generally speaking).....

....during a concert tour, when a band doesn't play any music from the next to most recent album.

Example: band XYZ just released their 6th album, they tour and their setlist consists of songs from their first 4 albums and their most recent record....and as future tours happen, they will only play songs from those 4 albums and their most recent album.

^ Beach Boys Syndrome

Quote
floodonthepage
The first group that comes to mind is U2. It seems that their albums and tours are no longer cultural appointments. I suppose the same could be true about the Stones, in terms of stature among younger generations, in comparing, for example, the craze for Stones tickets in '72 or even '81 vs. now.

But of course, I would say the Stones stature is quite secure, being an obsessed fan and all, but trying to step outside of that....I can see how "kids today" don't get nearly as excited about them and what they're currently doing.

But anyway, for me, U2's stature has definitely lessened over time. Same with Led Zeppelin, The Who and Aerosmith......and yep, even the Beatles. Used to listen to them a lot as a kid and young adult, but now very very rarely.....though the kids like to hear 'Yellow Submarine".....so I see a trend there.

U2 is possibly bigger than they were in the 1980s and 1990s regarding their tours. The 360 tour was remarkable, and all of their tours post POPMART have sold out.

Quote
Elmo Lewis
Send her my Love, wheel in the Sky, Don't Stop beleivin', who's Crying Now, Only the Young, Be Good to Yourself,Lights, Ask the Lonely, Feelin' that Way, Open Arms, and a few others.





I find it difficult to believe that anyone who has owned a radio in the past 40 years hasn't heard some of these songs.

As noted, "The Sopranos" use of "Don't Stop Believin'" really brought them to the attention of many younger fans.

Saw them at a Stones gig once in '81 where they opened and Joe Perry said something like 'We're America's favorite band!!'....and were ROUNDLY booed. Didn't they find his replacement from a guy on youtube who was singing some of their stuff?? From the Phillipines maybe?....something like that..

a band from Memphis TN that had one album, in 1971 with the four original members (but 3 albums with various lineups) has gone on to become certainly influential in indie-alt- pop rock. One original member is still with us and is a fine musician. Their albums were critically acclaimed but commercially ignored when they were made. The two principal songwriters wrote tunes that have since been often covered.
Anyone know the band I'm referring to?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-01-30 04:16 by duke richardson.

Big Star..........

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
floodonthepage
The first group that comes to mind is U2. It seems that their albums and tours are no longer cultural appointments. I suppose the same could be true about the Stones, in terms of stature among younger generations, in comparing, for example, the craze for Stones tickets in '72 or even '81 vs. now.

But of course, I would say the Stones stature is quite secure, being an obsessed fan and all, but trying to step outside of that....I can see how "kids today" don't get nearly as excited about them and what they're currently doing.

But anyway, for me, U2's stature has definitely lessened over time. Same with Led Zeppelin, The Who and Aerosmith......and yep, even the Beatles. Used to listen to them a lot as a kid and young adult, but now very very rarely.....though the kids like to hear 'Yellow Submarine".....so I see a trend there.

U2 is possibly bigger than they were in the 1980s and 1990s regarding their tours. The 360 tour was remarkable, and all of their tours post POPMART have sold out.

The 360 tour was remarkable, from what I hear, but it also took place 8-10 years ago (2009-2011). I've seen them three times dating back to the Pop Mart tour, most recently in 2015. The shows are amazing, but their albums have ceased to say much that hasn't been said, so again....for me, their stature has lessened. I've been a fan since "The Joshua Tree", and their latest "Songs of Experience" was the first that I didn't pursue.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-01-30 05:17 by floodonthepage.

U2 has definitely lessened. Stones may not have grown too much, but they've been at a peak commercially since Steel Wheels and maybe even Some Girls (forgetting about the ww3 period).

The Doors kinda peaked I think in popularity around the early 90s. They were big in the secondary school I went to at that time, probably around when the movie came out. A guy I went to school with, his brother won all the Doors albums & In Concert on CD, I promptly got cassette copies and my 15 year old ears were hooked!

I really liked the In Concert album (an amalgamation of Absolutely Live & Alive she cried) there’s an amazing version of The celebration of the Lizard on it with a brilliant Not to touch the earth in the middle. The first side is genius, who do you love, Alabama song, backdoor man, love hides, five to one. Bam, one after the other. Brilliant live album.

LA woman
The Doors
Strange days
Waiting for the sun
Morrison hotel
Soft parade

That’s my ranking of them after 25 years

I really liked An American Prayer, technically a Morrison album, with music by the Doors. I would get drunk and spout the shit on this album on occasions. There’s a great live version of Roadhouse Blues on it also.

I didn’t listen to the Doors for maybe 15 years. Morrison’s a bad influence.
But I came back to them about 5 years ago, and have enjoyed them as much as the first time round.

I caught the Ian Astbury / Doors 20th century tour a few years ago and it was good. Ray rattled on a bit, There was no densmore who was a huge part of that bands sound. I don’t think he could play that music without Morrison. He played off him a lot. Bit like Keith and Charlie or Moon and Townshend. But it was a good show. I was bolloxed at it though. Fri-Sun festival gig and that gig was the Monday...

Quote
Elmo Lewis
Good point about U2.

Yes spot on.

Quote
treaclefingers
U2 has definitely lessened. Stones may not have grown too much, but they've been at a peak commercially since Steel Wheels and maybe even Some Girls (forgetting about the ww3 period).

U2 still (?) produce new material and change. I prefer U2 live despite Bono being a political moron. Maybe U2 is a woman band. They will never allow themselves to grow old and stale.