For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
LongBeachArena72
Coudn't care less about box office. Am more interested in legacies, artistic and otherwise.
The three rock artists I have cared most about over the years are Bowie, Dylan, and The Stones. All have taken very different paths in their "twilight" years.
Bowie disappears for a decade, then releases a magnificent album, then ... who knows?
Dylan tours constantly and has released some of the best records of his career since 1997.
The Stones haven't recorded anything of any merit since (arguably) the 70's and yet are fresh off what has apparently been one of their most successful—and possibly rejuevnating—tours of their career.
So who's doing it right? Who's playing for posterity? How will history judge their outputs and how they managed their careers in their latter stages?
My preference is for new music, always. I regard all of these men as artists and look forward to what they have to say, musically, about the changing times we live in. By that measure, The Stones have fallen flat. It's been decades since they had anything relevant to say, in my opinion, about what it's like to be alive today. Whereas new records by Dylan, and THE NEXT DAY, are fascinating portraits of modern times, are chronicles by great men looking at what the world has become.
But The Stones keep touring and touring and touring and playing the same old songs ... and millions of people around the world continue to pony up the cash to sustain the juggernaut. In 50 years, will the view be that they sullied their glorious legacy by the endless repetition of what are known here as "The Vegas Years"? Probably not. Their catalog will be remembered and revered.
I just miss them. Miss hearing what they have to say about growing old. About still playing together after all these years. About women, and children, and grandchildren, and fame, and money, and love, and sex. They wrote some great songs about all those things.
Bowie and Dylan still do.
But what can they do if they've lost their muse?
They don't seem to be able to create together anymore, which is where most of the great music of the past emanated from.
I'm with you, I'd like to see something new and great, but how do they get there if they don't care?
Quote
Brstonesfan
The Stones legacy certainly will be greater than Dylan or Bowies. No comparison ....
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
LongBeachArena72
Coudn't care less about box office. Am more interested in legacies, artistic and otherwise.
The three rock artists I have cared most about over the years are Bowie, Dylan, and The Stones. All have taken very different paths in their "twilight" years.
Bowie disappears for a decade, then releases a magnificent album, then ... who knows?
Dylan tours constantly and has released some of the best records of his career since 1997.
The Stones haven't recorded anything of any merit since (arguably) the 70's and yet are fresh off what has apparently been one of their most successful—and possibly rejuevnating—tours of their career.
So who's doing it right? Who's playing for posterity? How will history judge their outputs and how they managed their careers in their latter stages?
My preference is for new music, always. I regard all of these men as artists and look forward to what they have to say, musically, about the changing times we live in. By that measure, The Stones have fallen flat. It's been decades since they had anything relevant to say, in my opinion, about what it's like to be alive today. Whereas new records by Dylan, and THE NEXT DAY, are fascinating portraits of modern times, are chronicles by great men looking at what the world has become.
But The Stones keep touring and touring and touring and playing the same old songs ... and millions of people around the world continue to pony up the cash to sustain the juggernaut. In 50 years, will the view be that they sullied their glorious legacy by the endless repetition of what are known here as "The Vegas Years"? Probably not. Their catalog will be remembered and revered.
I just miss them. Miss hearing what they have to say about growing old. About still playing together after all these years. About women, and children, and grandchildren, and fame, and money, and love, and sex. They wrote some great songs about all those things.
Bowie and Dylan still do.
But what can they do if they've lost their muse?
They don't seem to be able to create together anymore, which is where most of the great music of the past emanated from.
I'm with you, I'd like to see something new and great, but how do they get there if they don't care?
Quote
drbryantQuote
LongBeachArena72
Coudn't care less about box office. Am more interested in legacies, artistic and otherwise.
The three rock artists I have cared most about over the years are Bowie, Dylan, and The Stones. All have taken very different paths in their "twilight" years.
Bowie disappears for a decade, then releases a magnificent album, then ... who knows?
Dylan tours constantly and has released some of the best records of his career since 1997.
The Stones haven't recorded anything of any merit since (arguably) the 70's and yet are fresh off what has apparently been one of their most successful—and possibly rejuevnating—tours of their career.
So who's doing it right? Who's playing for posterity? How will history judge their outputs and how they managed their careers in their latter stages?
My preference is for new music, always. I regard all of these men as artists and look forward to what they have to say, musically, about the changing times we live in. By that measure, The Stones have fallen flat. It's been decades since they had anything relevant to say, in my opinion, about what it's like to be alive today. Whereas new records by Dylan, and THE NEXT DAY, are fascinating portraits of modern times, are chronicles by great men looking at what the world has become.
But The Stones keep touring and touring and touring and playing the same old songs ... and millions of people around the world continue to pony up the cash to sustain the juggernaut. In 50 years, will the view be that they sullied their glorious legacy by the endless repetition of what are known here as "The Vegas Years"? Probably not. Their catalog will be remembered and revered.
I just miss them. Miss hearing what they have to say about growing old. About still playing together after all these years. About women, and children, and grandchildren, and fame, and money, and love, and sex. They wrote some great songs about all those things.
Bowie and Dylan still do.
I think all of us older fans can understand those thoughts and have similar feelings. But, did you see the video of Midnight Rambler from Stockholm? This
Forum is the only place where people think that Vegas sounds like that.
Quote
Brstonesfan
It's a great thread worthy of a sticky. To gross so much and fill up stadiums is a significant accomplishment we all can be proud of. The hardcore fans want and expect us to be not Bly the greatest band, but GOP grossing of all time.
Quote
BeastQuote
Brstonesfan
It's a great thread worthy of a sticky. To gross so much and fill up stadiums is a significant accomplishment we all can be proud of. The hardcore fans want and expect us to be not Bly the greatest band, but GOP grossing of all time.
Tosh. I have *never* heard a single hardcore fan express any such expectation, let alone even talk about the subject!
Quote
Brstonesfan
There are not too many hardcore Stones fans left . We know that the Stones are far superior to any band or artist .
Quote
Brstonesfan
The Stones legacy certainly will be greater than Dylan or Bowies. No comparison ....
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Brstonesfan
There are not too many hardcore Stones fans left . We know that the Stones are far superior to any band or artist .
But that doesn't mean that we have to be cheering for higher ticket prices to be hardcore fans - something that would be important for the Stones to be the most profitable band on Earth...
Quote
treaclefingers
I think we need even higher prices. Keeps out the riff raff you know.
Quote
rebelrebelQuote
Brstonesfan
The Stones legacy certainly will be greater than Dylan or Bowies. No comparison ....
Not too sure about that though it depends what the legacy might focus on. For enduring popularity as a live act and commanding high ticket prices the Stones will win hands down. The Stones cultural legacy was made in the 60s, Bowie's in the 70s. More young bands today would cite Bowie as an influence than either the Stones or Dylan. Then there's the legacy of creativity - again, Dylan and Bowie have produced more work of a very high standard in their later career than the Stones. I know it's subjective but that is undoubtedly the mass critical consensus.
Quote
StonesCatQuote
rebelrebelQuote
Brstonesfan
The Stones legacy certainly will be greater than Dylan or Bowies. No comparison ....
Not too sure about that though it depends what the legacy might focus on. For enduring popularity as a live act and commanding high ticket prices the Stones will win hands down. The Stones cultural legacy was made in the 60s, Bowie's in the 70s. More young bands today would cite Bowie as an influence than either the Stones or Dylan. Then there's the legacy of creativity - again, Dylan and Bowie have produced more work of a very high standard in their later career than the Stones. I know it's subjective but that is undoubtedly the mass critical consensus.
I can see by your handle that you're probably a Bowie fan, but I'd say to most, he's not even in the same hemisphere as Dylan or the Stones. Maybe in the UK and Europe it's different, but in the States he's been irrelevant critically and commercially since the mid-80s. I'd be surprised if most young bands here know much of him, though that's their loss.
Quote
rebelrebelQuote
StonesCatQuote
rebelrebelQuote
Brstonesfan
The Stones legacy certainly will be greater than Dylan or Bowies. No comparison ....
Not too sure about that though it depends what the legacy might focus on. For enduring popularity as a live act and commanding high ticket prices the Stones will win hands down. The Stones cultural legacy was made in the 60s, Bowie's in the 70s. More young bands today would cite Bowie as an influence than either the Stones or Dylan. Then there's the legacy of creativity - again, Dylan and Bowie have produced more work of a very high standard in their later career than the Stones. I know it's subjective but that is undoubtedly the mass critical consensus.
I can see by your handle that you're probably a Bowie fan, but I'd say to most, he's not even in the same hemisphere as Dylan or the Stones. Maybe in the UK and Europe it's different, but in the States he's been irrelevant critically and commercially since the mid-80s. I'd be surprised if most young bands here know much of him, though that's their loss.
I wouldn't disagree. You are correct that my comment is made entirely from a UK perspective.
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Is it really hard to believe that SG and TY belonged to their "golden era" sales-wise?
Quote
georgelicksQuote
DandelionPowderman
Is it really hard to believe that SG and TY belonged to their "golden era" sales-wise?
Not so hard to believe with two smash hits as Miss You and Start Me Up and (in Tattoo You's case) a tour that sold almost 3 million tickets in 3 months.
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
georgelicksQuote
DandelionPowderman
Is it really hard to believe that SG and TY belonged to their "golden era" sales-wise?
Not so hard to believe with two smash hits as Miss You and Start Me Up and (in Tattoo You's case) a tour that sold almost 3 million tickets in 3 months.
What I find almost impossible to believe is that they haven't had a hit single on par with Start Me Up in 33 years. It's like the well instantly not only dried but was filled with concrete.
Not that there haven't been some excellent songs, but it's like they've forgotten how to write a hit single.
Quote
bye bye johnny
Hardly. Peak US chart position for the 'Rough Justice'/'Streets Of Love' double A-side was #25 on Billboard's "Mainstream Rock Tracks".
[www.beatzenith.com]
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
treaclefingersQuote
georgelicksQuote
DandelionPowderman
Is it really hard to believe that SG and TY belonged to their "golden era" sales-wise?
Not so hard to believe with two smash hits as Miss You and Start Me Up and (in Tattoo You's case) a tour that sold almost 3 million tickets in 3 months.
What I find almost impossible to believe is that they haven't had a hit single on par with Start Me Up in 33 years. It's like the well instantly not only dried but was filled with concrete.
Not that there haven't been some excellent songs, but it's like they've forgotten how to write a hit single.
In the US, you mean? Even SOL topped the charts
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
bye bye johnny
Hardly. Peak US chart position for the 'Rough Justice'/'Streets Of Love' double A-side was #25 on Billboard's "Mainstream Rock Tracks".
[www.beatzenith.com]
Supposedly, it topped the charts in Spain or Italy - hence my question.
Quote
StonesCatQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
bye bye johnny
Hardly. Peak US chart position for the 'Rough Justice'/'Streets Of Love' double A-side was #25 on Billboard's "Mainstream Rock Tracks".
[www.beatzenith.com]
Supposedly, it topped the charts in Spain or Italy - hence my question.
They had either top 5 or top 10 on every lead single in the 80s in the US, the decline didn't start until VL. If you want to look at a country that was a disappointment singleswise, it's the UK. The Stones lagged there from the early 70s on.
Quote
StonesCatQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
bye bye johnny
Hardly. Peak US chart position for the 'Rough Justice'/'Streets Of Love' double A-side was #25 on Billboard's "Mainstream Rock Tracks".
[www.beatzenith.com]
Supposedly, it topped the charts in Spain or Italy - hence my question.
They had either top 5 or top 10 on every lead single in the 80s in the US, the decline didn't start until VL. If you want to look at a country that was a disappointment singleswise, it's the UK. The Stones lagged there from the early 70s on.