The only disappointing J.Geils show I ever saw was when they supported the Stones!

Now - the first 4 studio albums and the first two live albums are fantastic R'n'R records. For me "Bloodshot" is one of the best albums - got it on red vinyl.
J.Geils Band was really great!

they were a great live act/cover band.

The stuff they wrote which became the big "hits" that get played on Classic Rock stations today, Centerfold and Freeezframe are absolute rubbish.

Unlike the Stones, they never had any talents for songwriting.

Tom Petty & the Heartbreakers

1. New York Dolls
2. Aerosmith
3. Black Crowes

These guys might disagree with some of y'all......

Peter Wolf with Mick Jagger





Peter Wolf with Keef

Probably the best warm up for the Stones in later years.But Peter Wolf is a long way behind Mick .Mick is in another league.U had Freddie Mercury still behind Mick as a front man.
Still gonna check out some of those early albums by J Geils

They criss-crossed the American Midwest relentlessly in the '70s so you could see the J. Geils Band every six months or so - and I did, probably a dozen times then. They became part of my DNA. Living in Michigan it was easy to attend their later returns to Detroit and I hit all those too. The second night at the Fillmore in Detroit was absolutely epic. They were shaky the first night likely because of Kid Rock, Jim McCarty and other Detroit rock royalty sitting in.

J. Geils retired shortly after that (infighting was said to be the reason) and utility guitarist Duke Robillard took over for J., himself augmented by a second guitarist. At this point they were still fun, they still sounded great but they DID NOT FEEL THE SAME. The soul of the band was J. Geils and they were never the same after he was gone.

I would argue J. was a guitarist in the same vein as Keith, more groove and feel than technique, and that transferred to the band as a whole - like Keith. For this reason I could easily see a comparison to the Stones. I certainly wouldn't reject the notion out of hand as many here are doing.

I like and admire Peter Wolf and have seen him both as a headliner and an opener in the last decade or so.

Having said that, J Geils band simply doesn't have the songs to be considered America's Rolling Stones. Neither does Aerosmith, nor the Black Crowes.

To be fair, the Rolling Stones have no parallel. The Faces might be their closest match and they do rock and I like them, yes I do.

Back to the USA. I have debated with like-minded individuals as to which band is America's greatest of the rock n roll era?

The candidates always seem to be:

Creedence Clearwater Revival
Lynyrd Skynyrd
Allman Bros.
The Doors
The Eagles
The Byrds
TP & Heartbreakers
Bruce & E Street

(The Band was 4 parts Canadian, and didn't have the longevity. But they were great, no doubt about it!)

From that roster of artists, I would have to argue that the two closest to the Stones in terms of style and substance are:

Lynyrd Skynyrd
Tom Petty & HB



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2022-04-18 19:44 by JimmyTheSaint.

Quote
JimmyTheSaint

The candidates always seem to be:

Creedence Clearwater Revival
Lynyrd Skynyrd
Allman Bros.
The Doors
The Eagles
The Byrds
TP & Heartbreakers
Bruce & E Street

That list does speak volumes in its own way

For me the Doors are absolutely not the american Stones but the only contenders in the league

Quote
More Hot Rocks
Centerfold and Freeze Frame. MTV schmaltz. The band lost my respect. A great band selling out. Just like ZZ Top going from a great band to doing crap like Legs. Or Steve Miller doing Abracadabra. How embarrassing.

Yes. You’re totally right.

Quote
JimmyTheSaint
I like and admire Peter Wolf and have seen him both as a headliner and an opener in the last decade or so.

Having said that, J Geils band simply doesn't have the songs to be considered America's Rolling Stones. Neither does Aerosmith, nor the Black Crowes.

To be fair, the Rolling Stones have no parallel. The Faces might be their closest match and they do rock and I like them, yes I do.

Back to the USA. I have debated with like-minded individuals as to which band is America's greatest of the rock n roll era?

The candidates always seem to be:

Creedence Clearwater Revival
Lynyrd Skynyrd
Allman Bros.
The Doors
The Eagles
The Byrds
TP & Heartbreakers
Bruce & E Street

(The Band was 4 parts Canadian, and didn't have the longevity. But they were great, no doubt about it!)

From that roster of artists, I would have to argue that the two closest to the Stones in terms of style and substance are:

Lynyrd Skynyrd
Tom Petty & HB

You'd have to define "the rock n roll era," for me.

I think you're leaving out a few:
Grateful Dead
Velvet Underground
Ramones
Beach Boys

1980's on:
Pearl Jam
Nirvana
GNR
REM

They are a great band and I was lucky to have seen them twice in the mid 70's and again about 10 years ago when they reunited and before J Geils (RIP) left the band again.

J. Geils the guitarist was really into Jazz and would play local clubs and tavern's here in Massachusetts with an acoustic upright bass player before he passed. Always a great show and he was very gracious signing autographs after the concerts.

Not sure I see them as the US Stones anymore than I think Aerosmith is.

J Geils reminds me more of B. Springsteen or South Side Johnny and the Asbury Jukes stylistically

If I was to pick a band for that title I think the Black Crowes are closer than J.Geils or Aerosmith to a Stones type vibe.

Those New Years Eve shows in Worcester were really great, so much fun. I would think Ventilator Blues would be a suitable song if they were to cover the Stones

No. Perhaps to a certain generation that saw them in the 70s but to me, in my teen years it was Centerfold and Freezeframe. Haven't heard from them since then. Would anyone under 40 know who they even are?

I looked in the search history here to try and find the thread where I complimented his guitar collection. I can't find the message, but there was a response, and the way it was worded I'm convinced was John Geils.

[www.youtube.com]

Funny to think of it, no matter how great so many American bands are, they lack something to be that great and big like those British bands. Those bands who actually created the story of rock as far as great bands go. Although almost all they did, those British dudes, they picked up from America. But The Stones, the Beatles, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, Queen, U2.. You name it. There is not anyone even close in America to touch those in the history of Rock'n'Roll. The British are superior. The Beach Boys, The Doors, Grateful Dead, The Eagles.. Forget it, marginal stuff compared to Brittons..

That said, J. Geils Band was a great band.

- Doxa



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2022-04-19 01:15 by Doxa.

Is this a logistic/commercial observation, or a musical one, not ruling out other American bands you didn't mention?



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2022-04-19 01:40 by TheflyingDutchman.

Quote
TheflyingDutchman
Is this a logistic/commercial observation, or a musical one?

In terms of musical significance and relevance in which, as we are talking about pop music, the commercial success and popularity has naturally a definitive role. Nothing to do with personal taste. Of course, personally I think American bands like the Velvet Underground and especially The Fugs have done much better music than, say, The Beatles. But that's not the point.

- Doxa

Quote
TheflyingDutchman
Is this a logistic/commercial observation, or a musical one, not ruling out other American bands you didn't mention?

Other American bands? Those were just the names I happened to recall. Are there any bigger, especially compared to those British ones? CCR, Guns'n'Roses, Metallica? Red Hot Chili Peppers might be actually the most popular (and best) nowadays (as far as nostalgia goes, like it always does as far as rock is concerned.)

- Doxa



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2022-04-19 01:43 by Doxa.

Sorry, my editing is real slow. I was more thinking in the direction of the black American blues based players, without whom Rock wouldn't even have existed. Comparing British Rock acts with American is in fact useless, and indeed a matter of taste and nostalgia, or even a win-win situation over the years.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2022-04-19 01:55 by TheflyingDutchman.

Quote
TheflyingDutchman
Sorry, my editing is real slow. I was more thinking in the direction of the black American blues based players, without whom Rock wouldn't even have existed.

Yeah, one could make any kind of preferences there and claim who is more important than some other. But it goes to personal preferences and snobbism. Surely, I personally think Robert Johnson and Muddy Waters are much more important than Elvis Presley, but doesn't that sound a bit stupid to say?

- Doxa

Quote
TheflyingDutchman
Sorry, my editing is real slow. I was more thinking in the direction of the black American blues based players, without whom Rock wouldn't even have existed. Comparing British Rock acts with American is in fact useless, and indeed a matter of taste and nostalgia, or even a win-win situation over the years.

Yeah, Make America Great Again. Sorry. I am sure there are bigger bands in America than the Beatles and the Stones. My historical mistake. I am not very good with facts any longer. Let's say those bands and times never existed, and if they did, it is just nostalgia. Like World War II.

- Doxa



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2022-04-19 02:05 by Doxa.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
TheflyingDutchman
Sorry, my editing is real slow. I was more thinking in the direction of the black American blues based players, without whom Rock wouldn't even have existed.

Yeah, one could make any kind of preferences there and claim who is more important than some other. But it goes to personal preferences and snobbism. Surely, I personally think Robert Johnson and Muddy Waters are much more important than Elvis Presley, but doesn't that sound a bit stupid to say?

- Doxa

Quite stupid. I even dare to say that Robert Johnson or even Chuck Berry are more "important" than the Stones, or the Beatles,
(not entirely sure about the Beatles) as their catalogue is based on the music of the authentic American players I mentioned. But then again, 7-tees and 8-tees American Rockbands ripped off the English, and typically American style, improved it, certainly on an harmonic and technical basis.It's a patriotic issue as well.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022-04-19 02:19 by TheflyingDutchman.

Quote
TheflyingDutchman

Quote
Doxa

Quote
TheflyingDutchman
Sorry, my editing is real slow. I was more thinking in the direction of the black American blues based players, without whom Rock wouldn't even have existed.

Yeah, one could make any kind of preferences there and claim who is more important than some other. But it goes to personal preferences and snobbism. Surely, I personally think Robert Johnson and Muddy Waters are much more important than Elvis Presley, but doesn't that sound a bit stupid to say?

- Doxa

Quite stupid. I even dare to say that Robert Johnson or even Chuck Berry are more "important" than the Stones, or the Beatles,
(not entirely sure about the Beatles) as their catalogue is based on the music of the authentic American players I mentioned. But then again, 7-tees and 8-tees American Rockbands ripped off the English, and typically American style, improved it, certainly on an harmonic and technical basis.It's a patriotic issue as well.

Yeah, but there are differences in 'ripping off' in terms of originality. Let'say, it is more creatively demanding to make commercial pop music out of marginal non-pop-music by nature than to make your own version of already highly-popular music. To make Mick Jagger out of Muddy Waters is much more a big thing than making a Steve Tyler out of Mick Jagger, I think.

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022-04-19 02:32 by Doxa.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
TheflyingDutchman

Quote
Doxa

Quote
TheflyingDutchman
Sorry, my editing is real slow. I was more thinking in the direction of the black American blues based players, without whom Rock wouldn't even have existed.

Yeah, one could make any kind of preferences there and claim who is more important than some other. But it goes to personal preferences and snobbism. Surely, I personally think Robert Johnson and Muddy Waters are much more important than Elvis Presley, but doesn't that sound a bit stupid to say?

- Doxa

Quite stupid. I even dare to say that Robert Johnson or even Chuck Berry are more "important" than the Stones, or the Beatles,
(not entirely sure about the Beatles) as their catalogue is based on the music of the authentic American players I mentioned. But then again, 7-tees and 8-tees American Rockbands ripped off the English, and typically American style, improved it, certainly on an harmonic and technical basis.It's a patriotic issue as well.

Yeah, but there are differences in 'ripping off' in terms of originality. Let'say, it is more creatively demanding to make commercial pop music out of marginal non-pop-music by nature than to make your own version of already highly-popular music. To make Mick Jagger out of Muddy Waters is much more a big thing than making a Steve Tyler out of Mick Jagger, I think.

- Doxa

Aha.I don't deny the greatness of the Stones, The Who ec. I just think that bands like ToTo, Steely Dan or Van Halen continued where bands like the Stones reached their creative peak.Bands like Guns and Rozes or Metallica are not my cup of tea; they are the worst example of American kitsch to me. All my personal taste of course.

Quote
More Hot Rocks
Centerfold and Freeze Frame. MTV schmaltz. The band lost my respect. A great band selling out. Just like ZZ Top going from a great band to doing crap like Legs. Or Steve Miller doing Abracadabra. How embarrassing.

Probably better than I give them credit for, but yes! Ceterfold & Freeze Frame were my 1st memories of them, and that's hard to get over.

I more equate them w/ Chicago, a band that some say are/were fantastic, but I knew them mainly from MTV's Hard Habit To Break, You're My Inspiration, Hard To Say Sorry -- total crap! I can't get past that to ever even attempt to listen to their earlier stuff.

Quote
TheflyingDutchman

Quote
Doxa

Quote
TheflyingDutchman

Quote
Doxa

Quote
TheflyingDutchman
Sorry, my editing is real slow. I was more thinking in the direction of the black American blues based players, without whom Rock wouldn't even have existed.

Yeah, one could make any kind of preferences there and claim who is more important than some other. But it goes to personal preferences and snobbism. Surely, I personally think Robert Johnson and Muddy Waters are much more important than Elvis Presley, but doesn't that sound a bit stupid to say?

- Doxa

Quite stupid. I even dare to say that Robert Johnson or even Chuck Berry are more "important" than the Stones, or the Beatles,
(not entirely sure about the Beatles) as their catalogue is based on the music of the authentic American players I mentioned. But then again, 7-tees and 8-tees American Rockbands ripped off the English, and typically American style, improved it, certainly on an harmonic and technical basis.It's a patriotic issue as well.

Yeah, but there are differences in 'ripping off' in terms of originality. Let'say, it is more creatively demanding to make commercial pop music out of marginal non-pop-music by nature than to make your own version of already highly-popular music. To make Mick Jagger out of Muddy Waters is much more a big thing than making a Steve Tyler out of Mick Jagger, I think.

- Doxa

Aha.I don't deny the greatness of the Stones, The Who ec. I just think that bands like ToTo, Steely Dan or Van Halen continued where bands like the Stones reached their creative peak.Bands like Guns and Rozes or Metallica are not my cup of tea; they are the worst example of American kitsch to me. All my personal taste of course.

Well, I always have thought that the Stones are the greatest rock and roll band in the world because they never had an idea what a rock and roll would be sound like or even be like. They created the idea by themselves. It all grew up so naturally from blues, they created themselves and they never had a rock band to copy, just their blues heroes. Surely, they along their career have taken inspiration from other bands, but their true idols and heroes have never been 'rock stars'. With the Beatles, they created the whole idea what is to be a rock band. What did they say... blues had a baby and they call it rock and roll. They could also call the baby simply The Rolling Stones.

Like Dylan said, there is not more original rock and roll band in the world than the Rolling Stones. They are a true masterpiece.

- Doxa



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2022-04-19 03:43 by Doxa.

Quote
Doxa
Funny to think of it, no matter how great so many American bands are, they lack something to be that great and big like those British bands. Those bands who actually created the story of rock as far as great bands go. Although almost all they did, those British dudes, they picked up from America. But The Stones, the Beatles, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, Queen, U2.. You name it. There is not anyone even close in America to touch those in the history of Rock'n'Roll. The British are superior. The Beach Boys, The Doors, Grateful Dead, The Eagles.. Forget it, marginal stuff compared to Brittons..

That said, J. Geils Band was a great band.

- Doxa

It becomes much closer if you include Bob Dylan, Jimi Hendrix, Neil Young, etc. for America (North America, I’m guessing). I know they’re not bands. But there’s no need to dismiss them.