Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Rolling Stones - living on past glories?

Options
  • 03-12-2012 4:24pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 33,692 ✭✭✭✭


    I have watched and read with interest all the hype surrounding their gig last week in London and impending tour.

    I would not class myself as a Stones fan, but often play their greatest hits CD in the car, and it is full of belting music.

    Thing is though, have they sort of become a tribute act to themselves? I was a massive Simple Minds fan back in the day and am thinking about going to their show next year, but they fall into the same category for me, that is a band that can't seem to produce good new music and who are living on their back catalogue.

    When was the last great song that the Stones released?


Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 4,452 ✭✭✭Rigsby


    NIMAN wrote: »
    are living on their back catalogue.

    .....and off the money paid in by countless millions of fans around the world for tickets to their concerts to see them perform the music from that back catalogue. Millions of fans would give a limb to see them perform live, even at this late stage of their (the Stones) musical lives.

    'Nuff said !! ;)


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,692 ✭✭✭✭NIMAN


    I am not disputing whether or not they are a big draw or not, thats a given. They will sell out anywhere they play of course.

    My question was when was the last time they produced anything that was good?


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,452 ✭✭✭Rigsby


    I dont know much about the Stone's later material. It may or may not be good. Perhaps the well has dried up :D

    They dont seem to need new music to draw the crowds. They have nothing to prove at this stage.

    I'd say that the majority of fans want to hear all the old hits, or they would not go to their concerts.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,815 ✭✭✭Hannibal


    Give their latest single "Doom and Gloom" a listen, it's a very good rock song and would easily stand up to any guitar driven track released this year. Their last studio album in I think 2005 was "A Bigger Bang" which is pretty good, maybe a 6/10 for me but their last great album was "Voodoo Lounge" in 1994 which is although what 18 years ago you have to consider they were around over 30 years at that stage.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,087 ✭✭✭Irish Aris


    NIMAN wrote: »
    Thing is though, have they sort of become a tribute act to themselves? I was a massive Simple Minds fan back in the day and am thinking about going to their show next year, but they fall into the same category for me, that is a band that can't seem to produce good new music and who are living on their back catalogue.

    You hit a soft spot with Simple Minds actually.
    I can understand your point about bands not producing high standard music anymore (though I found Simple Minds 2005 album Black and White very good), but the point is: if a band is very good in their live gigs and you are a fan of their music, do you really care if they don't produce good new music? Simpe Minds do a greatest hits tour, so it's the oldies. So do the Rolling Stones.
    Having said that, I wouldn't pay huge money to see The Rollong Stones, but first thing Friday morning I am buying my Simple Minds ticket.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,689 ✭✭✭Tombo2001


    If Seamus Heaney showed up to a reading, and read out a poem he wrote in 1969......would anyone see an issue with it?

    Yes of course they are living off past glories.

    Show me the singer/ bands that play to stadium crowds in this country that arent living off past glories. There's not too many of them.....


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,452 ✭✭✭Rigsby


    Tombo2001 wrote: »
    If Seamus Heaney showed up to a reading, and read out a poem he wrote in 1969......would anyone see an issue with it?

    Yes of course they are living off past glories.

    Show me the singer/ bands that play to stadium crowds in this country that arent living off past glories. There's not too many of them.....


    While I can see the point you are making, the poem analogy does not fit the situation IMO. People go to rock concerts for the atmosphere as much as the music itself. Big difference between a rock concert and a poem reading.

    Can someone explain to me what is wrong with a band like the Stones living off past glories ???

    As I said earlier, they have nothing left to prove, and as long as they have a willing, appreciative and paying audience, where is the problem ? :confused:


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,087 ✭✭✭Irish Aris


    Rigsby wrote: »
    While I can see the point you are making, the poem analogy does not fit the situation IMO. People go to rock concerts for the atmosphere as much as the music itself. Big difference between a rock concert and a poem reading.

    Can someone explain to me what is wrong with a band like the Stones living off past glories ???

    As I said earlier, they have nothing left to prove, and as long as they have a willing, appreciative and paying audience, where is the problem ? :confused:

    Totally agree with you.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,740 ✭✭✭kingtiger


    as far as I am concerned "The Rolling Stones" all died in 1981

    after that year a group of imposters where sprouted from pods to take their places


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭karaokeman


    Is it better to burn out or fade away, me thinks.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,815 ✭✭✭Hannibal


    karaokeman wrote: »
    Is it better to burn out or fade away, me thinks.
    in fairness to Keith Richards he's been trying to burn out the last 50 years.

    Any way the Stones aren't fading away, they could go on touring forever and are still one of the best live bands around. In Jagger and Richards they have one of the best frontmen and in my opinion the best rhythm guitar player in rock history


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,692 ✭✭✭✭NIMAN


    Irish Aris wrote: »
    You hit a soft spot with Simple Minds actually.
    I can understand your point about bands not producing high standard music anymore (though I found Simple Minds 2005 album Black and White very good), but the point is: if a band is very good in their live gigs and you are a fan of their music, do you really care if they don't produce good new music? Simpe Minds do a greatest hits tour, so it's the oldies. So do the Rolling Stones.
    Having said that, I wouldn't pay huge money to see The Rollong Stones, but first thing Friday morning I am buying my Simple Minds ticket.

    Am actually thinking of going to see simple Minds again myself, and I too thought the B&W album was decent enough.

    As for an act which fills stadiums who still produces decent music? Springsteen springs to mind. But agree that most don't really produce anything either new or good - think of Fleetwood Mac, Bon Jovi for 2.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,901 ✭✭✭Raif Severance


    Start Me Up was the last Stone Song that I like. I don't think I've listened to any of their Album past Tatoo You.

    My Dad who has collected all of their Album says, that all of their Albums past 1981 are average at best.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,901 ✭✭✭Raif Severance


    Start Me Up was the last Stone Song that I like. I don't think I've listened to any of their Album past Tatoo You.

    My Dad who has collected all of their Album says, that all of their Albums past 1981 are average at best.


  • Registered Users Posts: 240 ✭✭Runonewon


    Went to see the Stones at Shea Stadium in the late 80s Steel Wheels Tour when i lived in New York.They were one of the biggest let downs i've ever witnessed.The Mets shortstop had better moves than Jagger and his dodgy back!!!:D:D


  • Registered Users Posts: 145 ✭✭madness98


    They were the first big thing to happen to rock n roll so why shouldn't they live on past glories? They were fantastic at their time 60/70's and I think credit due when they are in their 70's and still able to put on a live show to thousands of people!


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,231 ✭✭✭bullpost


    I went to see Simple Minds on their 5x5 tour a while back. This was the tour where they played music exclusively from their first five albums - a time when I loved them. The early songs in particular sounded great and the band were probably able to showcase them in a way that they were not when the songs were written , because they now have access to superior instruments etc..
    These songs were from a period where the band were at their creative best but not at their commercial prime.
    Something like this would to me justify going to see a band "past their prime". I have no interest in the Stadium rock they went on to do after these albums and would have no interest in going to see them play a greatest hits tour.
    Irish Aris wrote: »
    You hit a soft spot with Simple Minds actually.
    I can understand your point about bands not producing high standard music anymore (though I found Simple Minds 2005 album Black and White very good), but the point is: if a band is very good in their live gigs and you are a fan of their music, do you really care if they don't produce good new music? Simpe Minds do a greatest hits tour, so it's the oldies. So do the Rolling Stones.
    Having said that, I wouldn't pay huge money to see The Rollong Stones, but first thing Friday morning I am buying my Simple Minds ticket.


Advertisement