For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
24FPS
This is so sad. Rock and Roll is on its last legs. Only the Museum groups are left, playing their Greatest Hits over and over. At higher prices yet. I guess U2 will have been the last relevant rock group.
Quote
Hairball
For what it's worth, my wife and I saw them with Glen Frey in 2005, and to be honest it was rather quite bland - note for note/precise renditions of their greatest hits, along with various solo material from various members. Setlist
That said, I'll always like many of their studio recordings, and in hindsight, pleased I was able to see them with a proper lineup.
Quote
RollingFreak
its basically the same as Keith's participation at a Stones performance. He's really NOT necessary, he's really not doing much of anything, but personally I need him there.
Quote
HairballQuote
RollingFreak
its basically the same as Keith's participation at a Stones performance. He's really NOT necessary, he's really not doing much of anything, but personally I need him there.
Sorry to disagree, but that sounds ridiculous and there's really no comparison.
Quote
steffialiciaQuote
24FPS
This is so sad. Rock and Roll is on its last legs. Only the Museum groups are left, playing their Greatest Hits over and over. At higher prices yet. I guess U2 will have been the last relevant rock group.
I think you're looking at this in the wrong way. Many of these songs are out and out masterpieces. Would you ever get tired of hearing Bach, Beethoven, etc.
Quote
RollingFreakQuote
HairballQuote
RollingFreak
its basically the same as Keith's participation at a Stones performance. He's really NOT necessary, he's really not doing much of anything, but personally I need him there.
Sorry to disagree, but that sounds ridiculous and there's really no comparison.
Oh, I expected nothing less lol.
Quote
HairballQuote
RollingFreakQuote
HairballQuote
RollingFreak
its basically the same as Keith's participation at a Stones performance. He's really NOT necessary, he's really not doing much of anything, but personally I need him there.
Sorry to disagree, but that sounds ridiculous and there's really no comparison.
Oh, I expected nothing less lol.
Seriously though - while Glen Frey was replaceable (and evidently not missed much in the lineup by most), the same can not be said for Keith.
While Eagles fans and the general public have accepted this latest diluted version (based on the success of sales, etc.), I don't think the Stones without Keith would fare as well - at least not from Stones fans.
Keith is still cranking out the riffs and is half the engine - just this last summer his playing was better than it's been in years, and without him the sound would truly suffer immeasurably.
To say "he's really not necessary" and "he's really not doing much of anything" seems a bit misguided, and that's putting it mildly.
Quote
keefriffhard4lifeQuote
HairballQuote
RollingFreakQuote
HairballQuote
RollingFreak
its basically the same as Keith's participation at a Stones performance. He's really NOT necessary, he's really not doing much of anything, but personally I need him there.
Sorry to disagree, but that sounds ridiculous and there's really no comparison.
Oh, I expected nothing less lol.
Seriously though - while Glen Frey was replaceable (and evidently not missed much in the lineup by most), the same can not be said for Keith.
While Eagles fans and the general public have accepted this latest diluted version (based on the success of sales, etc.), I don't think the Stones without Keith would fare as well - at least not from Stones fans.
Keith is still cranking out the riffs and is half the engine - just this last summer his playing was better than it's been in years, and without him the sound would truly suffer immeasurably.
To say "he's really not necessary" and "he's really not doing much of anything" seems a bit misguided, and that's putting it mildly.
it s4eems misguided on the Frey side as he sang some of the bands biggest hits. keith Richards sings zero of the bands biggest hits
Quote
Rolling Freak
seems like an unbiased observation if we were all being honest
Quote
HairballQuote
keefriffhard4lifeQuote
HairballQuote
RollingFreakQuote
HairballQuote
RollingFreak
its basically the same as Keith's participation at a Stones performance. He's really NOT necessary, he's really not doing much of anything, but personally I need him there.
Sorry to disagree, but that sounds ridiculous and there's really no comparison.
Oh, I expected nothing less lol.
Seriously though - while Glen Frey was replaceable (and evidently not missed much in the lineup by most), the same can not be said for Keith.
While Eagles fans and the general public have accepted this latest diluted version (based on the success of sales, etc.), I don't think the Stones without Keith would fare as well - at least not from Stones fans.
Keith is still cranking out the riffs and is half the engine - just this last summer his playing was better than it's been in years, and without him the sound would truly suffer immeasurably.
To say "he's really not necessary" and "he's really not doing much of anything" seems a bit misguided, and that's putting it mildly.
it s4eems misguided on the Frey side as he sang some of the bands biggest hits. keith Richards sings zero of the bands biggest hits
Well tell that to all the people who are buying Eagles tickets and don't seem to care who has replaced Glenn Frey.
Then ask yourself how much of the Stones sound is based around Keith's guitar playing - doesn't matter if he sings zero of their hits - the sound of the band is based around his guitar playing and the riffs he created.
Quote
MKjan
Rock'n' Roll would be better off if The Eagles and U2 never existed.
Quote
keefriffhard4lifeQuote
HairballQuote
keefriffhard4lifeQuote
HairballQuote
RollingFreakQuote
HairballQuote
RollingFreak
its basically the same as Keith's participation at a Stones performance. He's really NOT necessary, he's really not doing much of anything, but personally I need him there.
Sorry to disagree, but that sounds ridiculous and there's really no comparison.
Oh, I expected nothing less lol.
Seriously though - while Glen Frey was replaceable (and evidently not missed much in the lineup by most), the same can not be said for Keith.
While Eagles fans and the general public have accepted this latest diluted version (based on the success of sales, etc.), I don't think the Stones without Keith would fare as well - at least not from Stones fans.
Keith is still cranking out the riffs and is half the engine - just this last summer his playing was better than it's been in years, and without him the sound would truly suffer immeasurably.
To say "he's really not necessary" and "he's really not doing much of anything" seems a bit misguided, and that's putting it mildly.
it s4eems misguided on the Frey side as he sang some of the bands biggest hits. keith Richards sings zero of the bands biggest hits
Well tell that to all the people who are buying Eagles tickets and don't seem to care who has replaced Glenn Frey.
Then ask yourself how much of the Stones sound is based around Keith's guitar playing - doesn't matter if he sings zero of their hits - the sound of the band is based around his guitar playing and the riffs he created.
as yourself how many people will show up to see something billed as "the rolling stones" with no keith. the answer is a ton. there are people who don't even know who sings "take it to the limit". I think you are no in touch with the general public who see "the eagles" are touring and show up. Freys son is there and so was big name himself vince gill
Quote
RokyfanQuote
steffialiciaQuote
24FPS
This is so sad. Rock and Roll is on its last legs. Only the Museum groups are left, playing their Greatest Hits over and over. At higher prices yet. I guess U2 will have been the last relevant rock group.
I think you're looking at this in the wrong way. Many of these songs are out and out masterpieces. Would you ever get tired of hearing Bach, Beethoven, etc.
Actually, the more correct analogy would be if Bach and Beethoven stopped writing new stuff and went on the road (they did tour and play in public) playing their early masterpieces. As long as they were alive, they continued to write new stuff, unlike Eagles, Stones, etc. Obviously, that stopped once they died. I guess what you are saying is that the classic rock groups are creatively dead.