For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
stickydion
Doxa wrote:
"Well, the fact that EXILE got quite negative critiques at the time of its release - and is nowadays considered to be one of the most important msterpieces ever - it is in total opposition to the current trend that every new Stones product gets very positive reviews - and will be forgotten in a year or two."
Doxa, the difference you mention has to do with band's longevity rather with music's quality IMO. Legendary bands and legendary solo artists who have reached a highest level of creativity in their first 10-15 years are paying a "cost": their own myth does "capture" them! I'm not talking about their plans or desires. I'm talking about what people are thinking. And people very often refuse to accept that newer creations could be considered as equivalent to the previous anthems. Even if the newer stuff deserve to. "Coats Head Soup" remaines an extremely underrated album in the entire Stones history, due to the theory, the dogma could say, that "nothing can compare with 1968-1972 years". Even "Some Girls" and "Tatoo You", despite the fact that they have been the best selling Stones albums ever, are not considered as classics in a way close to 1968-72 years.
Every new Stones product gets very positive reviews just because it deserves it. But noone could count it as equivalent to the classics, just because people think this would be ...sacrilegious. The same happens to every legendary artist who is around for decades. Bob Dylan has created some great albums in the last 25-30 years. Can anyone name one or two classics from them? Not even "Slow Train Coming" is considered as classic in a way similar to the 60s and 70s Bob's stuff. Patti Smith offered us excellent albums in the last years. Any classic? No. Think about U2 albums since 1991. Have these albums the reputation and the recognition band's stuff from 80s had? I don't think so. Any classic album from David Bowie, Van Morrison or Macca in the last 20 years? No.
The three last studio albums the Stones offered us were realy good IMO. That's enough to me.
PS: if word "classic" sounds too "arrogant" and heavy to your ears, OK, i just mean albums strongly engraved in public's memory.
Quote
stickydion
Cool points CharliMoon and mikey...
CharliMoon, when "Exile" came out many people said "game over for the Stones"... The majority of the reviews for "Exile" was negative! Do you believe it? The same happened when "Goats Head Soup" came out... The same game over and over again...
Quote
LA FORUM I dont think the Stones would get a contract if they were a new band - maybe a stupid theory, but still.
quote
I think quite the opposite. If any of their "modern Era" albums had been released by a new unknown band they'd have been raved about.
Quote
wee bobby lennox
i was at the last stones concert and i can honestly say i felt the performance was better than what ive seen from some clips from the 70,s,
Quote
Spud
I don't think that argument stands up. We don't focus on the backing musicians when judging a performance.
Quote
jamesfdouglas
... I can't really argue that, Doxa. It's a 'show' now. I still think that when they started using a kabillion extras in 89-90, the five members were still driving the tunes home. The b/u folks, over the years, have helped make the decline much less noticeable.
Here's some baseless specualation!
It's almost like they'd set it up in 89 to be this way - in case more and more tours happen (they knew, being in their mid 40's, that if they were in it for a long haul they'd need the back-up down the road).
Quote
stickydion
Agree, "Time out of mind" is an excellent album. And for sure it isn't the only one good album created by Bob, in the last 30 years. But noone considers it as classic.
Quote
T&A
Desire is considered a "dog" by many (not me)..
Quote
GazzaQuote
T&A
Desire is considered a "dog" by many (not me)..
Writing a song glorifying a violent mobster didnt exactly sit too well with some people as I recall.
Now its regarded as a masterpiece!
Quote
stickydion
LA FORUM wrote:
(1) "Well, I think the reviews are a bit too postive, or forgiving, compared to other modern artists. I dont think the Stones would get a contract if they were a new band - maybe a stupid theory, but still."
You must be kidding...
(2) "But about Dylan, one of his best albums is Time out of mind. I know Oh Mercy got good reviews but Time is THE comeback album."
Agree, "Time out of mind" is an excellent album. And for sure it isn't the only one good album created by Bob, in the last 30 years. But noone considers it as classic. That was my point, as you can see on my previous post.
Quote
stickydion
Gazza, do you really think these awards make an album "classic"?? Play some tracks from "Desire", let's suppose "Hurricane", "Isis", "One more cup of coffe" and "Sara", to some persons coming from the general public. Do the same with any track from "Time out of mind" you want. Do you think the reactions will be the same?
Quote
GazzaQuote
stickydion
Agree, "Time out of mind" is an excellent album. And for sure it isn't the only one good album created by Bob, in the last 30 years. But noone considers it as classic.
They dont? Why dont you ask Bob's fans or the Grammy committee who gave it three awards, including Album of the Year?
Quote
BluzDude
I'll tell you what, to all those who have some criticizm about an aspect of the Stones, that's fine, we are all entitled to our opinions and often it is constructive. But to those of you who feel the Rolling Stones are on a downward spiral and just give it up, please...let us who still enjoy the band continue to do so. If you don't like what our boys have become, then you don't have to listen. Face it, they are not going to wake up tomorrow morning and become the band they were in the 1970's.