nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

You'll never be in a 70s rock band - why even live?

Germazoid

Just watched Lynyrd Skynyrd performing Freebird on Youtube. Just think the kind of life those guys lived, fame, money, a harem of beautiful young groupies waiting for you at every hotel etc.

Even if you were a rock star today you'd be expected to be like Ed Sheeran. It's depressing.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Oscar Bravo

Quote "Pick any time in pop history and you'll have a "Birdy song" near the top of the charts"

True that! Remember when Vienna from Ultravox was kept off the top spot from this guy

Beasty

Those of us brought up in the 60s and 70s discovered what rock was about, before the punks trashed it. Those megastars of the 70s played "Stadium Rock" in the 80s and 90s. Those who survived into the noughties redefined the genre - the Monsters of Rock became the Rock Dinosaurs. And the weird thing is they can still play their guitars, beat their drums, and sing in some cases better than they ever did. Saw the Who last year - Daltrey's voice is phenomenal for a guy in his mid 70s. Queen put on a hell of a show at the 3 Arena last year. Elton John is still standing after decades at the top.

Of course we've lost the likes of Hendrix, Morrison, Bolan, Moon, Lennon, Lynott, Freddie, Harrison and Bowie, but their music stands the test of time.

When you look at the likes of the Stones, the Who, AC/DC and the remnants of Pink Floyd still playing at the highest level 40, 50+ years after they first hit the headlines I guess those of us who have been around throughout that period have something special to remember

I'm not convinced many of the recent generations of "pop" stars will still be playing at such a high level by the time I'm 6 feet under....

Oscar Bravo

Slade were a good group to. very loud!

Beasty

Oscar Bravo wrote: »

Slade were a good group to. very loud!

Slade were great - they had loads of hits in the early 70s, but then tried, but failed, to conquer the States. When they came back they played Monsters of Rock at Donnington and suddenly acquired a hard rock following

Must have seen them 4 or 5 times in the early eighties and they never disappointed, even if it did appear a little strange when they were donning Santa outfits in March!

Alas Noddy had to give up due to problems with his voice. Dave Hill is still playing with Don Powell under the Slade brand (neither of them contributed to the writing of Merry XMas Everybody, so don't get the annual royalties that Noddy and Jim Lea have effectively retired on)

Wibbs

Beasty wrote: »

Those of us brought up in the 60s and 70s discovered what rock was about, before the punks trashed it.

More like before Punk lit a fire under the endless and self indulgent pretentious twittering that rock had become and get rock back to its two or three minutes get in get out, drop a hook and eff off of its beginnings. There's only so many 20 minute drum solos and yak bladder drones the open and plastic mind can take.

Those megastars of the 70s played "Stadium Rock" in the 80s and 90s. Those who survived into the noughties redefined the genre

Not really. With vanishingly few exceptions their best was in the past and they were and remain very lucrative cabaret acts appealing to nostalgia.

And the weird thing is they can still play their guitars, beat their drums, and sing in some cases better than they ever did. Saw the Who last year - Daltrey's voice is phenomenal for a guy in his mid 70s. Queen put on a hell of a show at the 3 Arena last year. Elton John is still standing after decades at the top.

To paraphrase Johnson: "Sir, elderly stadium rockers are like a dog walking on his hind legs. It is not done well, but you are surprised to find it done at all." Yes some can certainly put on a great show and as you say Daltrey is still in possession of one helluva set of pipes and Mick Jagger is a wonder of biology to be bouncing around to that degree at that age. Never mind his bouncing around on I like him for his personality ladies looking to and extending his dynasty. He's an inspiration for ageing. However it's much more about the 300 quid a ticket taxi there and back comfortable suburban nostalgia. Which is fine, but they left the leading edge of artistic relevance 30 or 40 years ago.

Of course we've lost the likes of Hendrix, Morrison, Bolan, Moon, Lennon, Lynott, Freddie, Harrison and Bowie, but their music stands the test of time.

I'd agree there.

When you look at the likes of the Stones, the Who, AC/DC and the remnants of Pink Floyd still playing at the highest level 40, 50+ years after they first hit the headlines

Still selling tickets which is amazing, but "at the highest level" is a stretch. Every single one of those named would blow the doors off their current outings when they were twenty odd years old.

I guess those of us who have been around throughout that period have something special to remember

Every generation thinks that and the older they get, the more they believe it. The "in my day" brigade, indulging the past and acting like tour guides in their own personal cultural history.

andekwarhola

The best one I read was John Bonham - when flying by private jet from Los Angeles to New York - drunkenly trying to open the jet’s hatch to take a piss while the plane was flying over Kansas City.

Coldplay would probably be too busy chairing a meeting about targeting important global vegan focus markets.

Conservatory

Keith moon turning up to a record execs boardroom meeting on a moped with a bag of cans hanging from the handle always makes me chuckle.
He drove it up in the lift

Ipso

Beasty wrote: »

Those of us brought up in the 60s and 70s discovered what rock was about, before the punks trashed it. Those megastars of the 70s played "Stadium Rock" in the 80s and 90s. Those who survived into the noughties redefined the genre - the Monsters of Rock became the Rock Dinosaurs. And the weird thing is they can still play their guitars, beat their drums, and sing in some cases better than they ever did. Saw the Who last year - Daltrey's voice is phenomenal for a guy in his mid 70s. Queen put on a hell of a show at the 3 Arena last year. Elton John is still standing after decades at the top.

Of course we've lost the likes of Hendrix, Morrison, Bolan, Moon, Lennon, Lynott, Freddie, Harrison and Bowie, but their music stands the test of time.

When you look at the likes of the Stones, the Who, AC/DC and the remnants of Pink Floyd still playing at the highest level 40, 50+ years after they first hit the headlines I guess those of us who have been around throughout that period have something special to remember

I'm not convinced many of the recent generations of "pop" stars will still be playing at such a high level by the time I'm 6 feet under....

Let’s go yell at a cloud together.

Anesthetize

Black Flag and Minor Threat did more for rock music than Lynyrd Skynyrd did.

*sits back and eats popcorn*

dasdog

Amateurs compared to John Coltrane and Miles Davis both musically and in regards to heroin fueled antics.

Ash.J.Williams

somefeen wrote: »

Great musicians are still around. There are guitarists out their easily on par with like of Hendrix etc right now.
But that style of music isn't popular anymore, theyre musicians musicians if you know what I mean.

They're still drowning in fanny and strangled by willy but its just Berkeley school of music sex organs that they are engorging.

They're not hendrix though

Tigerbaby

andekwarhola wrote: »

The best one I read was John Bonham - when flying by private jet from Los Angeles to New York - drunkenly trying to open the jet’s hatch to take a piss while the plane was flying over Kansas City.

Coldplay would probably be too busy chairing a meeting about targeting important global vegan focus markets.

Hopefully that was the back door of the 727 they hired!

I was lucky enough to see Zeppelin in 1979 and 1980. Great band live.

Nevertheless, was also blessed to see Black Label Society in the Tivoli a few weeks back with my son and his GF. Now THAT was an awesome gig too.

Like Neil Young said; "Like a water-washed diamond in a river of sin", good music is still out there.

Ash.J.Williams

It was no accident that metallica played here every year of the celtic tiger and haven't been back since

in fact they even put ireland before South America the last time due to a strong euro and potential crash the following year.

machiavellianme

Anesthetize wrote: »

Black Flag and Minor Threat did more for rock music than Lynyrd Skynyrd did.

*sits back and eats popcorn*

I think you meant Big Black.

Mint Sauce

The Foos, and QOTSA can well compete against the latest generation wanna bes.

Although do often wonder, if both Groll, and Homme were starting out now, and rocked up to XFactor, would they get through. Simon probably would not consider them profitbable enough, against the more popular genres.

somefeen

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

They're not hendrix though

And Hendrix isn't them :pac:

I know that maybe you don't mean it but I'm gonna use it as a chance to get on my soap box about another pet peeve of mine. Im going on a rant not directed at you.
People just decide that Hendrix, Clapton, Stevie Ray Vaughan and all the usual suspects were the best there ever was and ever will be. Its a twisted romantising of the past, there are musicians out there that are absolutely mind blowingly good, equally as mind blowing as any of those guys were in their day. They don't get rated as highly because they are not Hendrix et al.
Hendrix is dead, he was unique, of course no one will ever play like Hendrix and if he was alive today Hendrix couldn't play like Steve Vai or Buckethead.

Everyone has a unique voice on their instrument that cant be replicated.

I was at a gig a few weeks ago and got to see an amazing drummer. Out in the smoking area afterwards I heard someone say "Ah yeah but he can't play like John Bonham"
Well of course he can't because he's not John Bonham. But guarantee if Bonham was alive he couldn't play like this guy either.

Never get this bollocks in any other art form. I dont hear people passing remarks about young painters like "Ah yeah but I betcha she can't paint the mona lisa like Da Vinci"

sbsquarepants

Germazoid wrote: »

Even if you were a rock star today you'd be expected to be like Ed Sheeran. It's depressing.

He's got a shed full of money, he always seems to be drunk and he got a shot of Taylor Swift and Ellie Goulding - that's not too bad for a ginger busker, you'd have to admit.

Beasty

Conservatory wrote: »

Keith moon turning up to a record execs boardroom meeting on a moped with a bag of cans hanging from the handle always makes me chuckle.
He drove it up in the lift

Driving a Rolls Royce into a swimming pool was another of his famous "pranks" - it appears though that some of these stunts were embellished either due to the passage time, or more importantly because Moon himself had absolutely no recollection of some of the things he did. He was happy to beef them up when he was a bit more sober/less high and had a reputation to protect.....

Beasty

Wibbs wrote: »

More like before Punk lit a fire under the endless and self indulgent pretentious twittering that rock had become and get rock back to its two or three minutes get in get out, drop a hook and eff off of its beginnings. There's only so many 20 minute drum solos and yak bladder drones the open and plastic mind can take.

Now come on Wibbs, we're allowed our rose tinted glasses are we not?:)

Anyway, what I would say is yes most have fallen by the wayside, but those who survived did so for a reason - mainly because they were, and still are, bloody good. I could not believe how well Daltry had aged when I saw the who last year. The year before it was AC/DC, with Angus Young increasingly reminding me of Gollum with his disappearing hairline and hunched over look. Yes they have their "props" of younger musicians to "support" them on stage. These are bands though that I saw 35 years ago, and I genuinely believe they are as good now as they were then, but in some ways better as the technology has moved on and enabled them to put on more spectacular shows. Equally I saw some rock bands that were pretty naff live - they are typically the ones that did not survive, maybe because the money now is in the tours rather than topping the album or singles charts

I never saw Pink Floyd live, but saw Roger Waters last year - to start off with I thought he was relying on his backing singers but it became quite clear that he still had it both in voice and the music.

Interestingly I did see Fleetwood Mac back around 1990, and thought they were great, but there was no Lindsey Buckingham. Saw them at the Point around 2009/10 with him and I thought they were phenomenal. Then I saw them back in 2014, and I walked out before the encore - they had pretty much their "full" complement of surviving "main" members but they came across as entirely relying on their past successes and getting no-where near their previous performance (in my mind anyway)

sbsquarepants

I just never got the appeal of Pink Floyd live - just too self indulgent and wanky for my liking.

My favourite rock and roll excess story is actually one of abstinence -

Story goes that Mick Jagger, infuriated that Charlie Watts had blown off an after show party to get an early night, rang his hotel room and demanded that "my drummer" come down and party like a rock star.
Charlie got out of bed, had a shave, put on a nice suit and duly made his way to Micks room. When Mick came over to greet him he Rocky Balboa'd him square in the jaw and then stood over him snarling "I'm not your fúcking drummer, you're my singer, don't you forget that again" and then toddled back off to bed.:D

Wibbs

Beasty wrote: »

Now come on Wibbs, we're allowed our rose tinted glasses are we not?:)

true enough. Technology has definitely helped keep the old guys in the game for longer. It makes them sound better and means that they can play some songs live they never could in the past. One reason the Beatles stopped touring(other than they were just dog tired of it) was they simply couldn't do most of their new studio stuff live. The technology wasn't there. In a way I'm glad that was the case and also glad that they broke up when they did. Young, vital, relevant and at the top of their game. There could have been one good leading edge album left in them around 1970-71, but after that they might have produced the odd good album/song but would have been behind the curve. They wouldn't have repeated the "WTF have I just listened to" innovation of their peak.

Few artists in any art form can continue to be ahead, be revolutionary, be relevant. The majority peak in their twenties, some can keep that fire lit into their thirties, but after that it's mostly repetition on a theme, or playing to their contemporaries in their audience, or attempts to go "experimental"(which rarely works). In the visual arts only one I can think of bucked that trend into old age and that was Matisse. In his final years he became truly revolutionary and relevant again. Picasso kept the fire lit for longer than most. Into his fifties anyway. Writers, architects and designers can have much longer working lives of relevance. Music is generally a young man or woman's game as far as innovation and relevance goes. To be fair to our own U2, they did pass the twenties threshold and stayed relevant and on the edge into their early forties. Certainly far more than a band like the Rolling Stones did. Genre's vary too. Variations on a blues theme are "easier" to keep going for longer than staying experimental and popular.

sbsquarepants wrote: »

I just never got the appeal of Pink Floyd live - just too self indulgent and wanky for my liking.

Kinda the same. I fully understand why many like them and they were one helluva talented band, but they never really appealed to me. It was all a bit too middle class English boys amping up the pretence too often for me. Suburban rock.

Irish Guitarist

Before Ed King was in Lynyrd Skynyrd he played in The Strawberry Alarm Clock. That's him in the gold suit.

He played lead guitar on Sweet Home Alabama but left Lynyrd Skynyrd in 1975 and was replaced by Steve Gaines who was killed in the plane crash.

Grayditch

Whatever about his cack music, Ed Sheran is a fiend for booze and coke, so that might not the best person to use for juxtaposition.

Hector Savage

I see these teenagers wearing RAMONES , Nirvana, and the other day a Motorhead t shirt - I used to think fair play to them - but I wonder do they even know they exist ?

Beasty

Hector Savage wrote: »

I see these teenagers wearing RAMONES , Nirvana, and the other day a Motorhead t shirt - I used to think fair play to them - but I wonder do they even know they exist ?

Which decade are you in? - none of them exist any more:pac:

Sleepy

Wibbs wrote: »

Few artists in any art form can continue to be ahead, be revolutionary, be relevant. The majority peak in their twenties, some can keep that fire lit into their thirties, but after that it's mostly repetition on a theme, or playing to their contemporaries in their audience, or attempts to go "experimental"(which rarely works). In the visual arts only one I can think of bucked that trend into old age and that was Matisse. In his final years he became truly revolutionary and relevant again. Picasso kept the fire lit for longer than most. Into his fifties anyway. Writers, architects and designers can have much longer working lives of relevance. Music is generally a young man or woman's game as far as innovation and relevance goes. To be fair to our own U2, they did pass the twenties threshold and stayed relevant and on the edge into their early forties. Certainly far more than a band like the Rolling Stones did. Genre's vary too. Variations on a blues theme are "easier" to keep going for longer than staying experimental and popular.

David Bowie - the exception that proves the rule.

Irish Guitarist

This thread is like the comment section of a music video on YouTube. "Led Zeppelin are awesome. Like this comment if you think they're better than garbage like Justin Bieber".

Wibbs

Sleepy wrote: »

David Bowie - the exception that proves the rule.

Yes and no S. Yes he certainly stayed "with it" for longer than most and there were reminders of his genius in his latter years, but again his best work and the work he'll be remembered for in centuries to come was pretty much exclusively produced in his twenties up to his mid 30's, from 1969-1983. Which is bloody impressive. Precious few can keep a peak going for five years, never mind nearly fifteen and never mind continually pushing the boundaries of the art form. The Stones for example had about a five year peak, but innovative they were not, or at least in a limited way.

He was near enough the first to seek out producers and collaborators very different from where he was coming from and this shaped his output in a big way. A very clever and insightful move. Keeps you on your creative toes for longer. U2 and Madonna have also gone this route to good effect. He also branched out into other art forms like dance, acting, art, fashion. The word "genius" is bandied about way too much of late, but Dave Bowie was most certainly an example of one.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

mfceiling

Conservatory wrote: »

There’s something inside me that hates ed Sheeran and modern day rappers and Beyoncé.
It’s unhealthy and I should really work on that but I can’t even control my face when somebody tells me they are fans of them in real life.

This^^

Neighbour had a 40th birthday party in his house last year. The most boring generic pop shìte music you could imagine (from his Spotify playlist"

He comes over to me and says

"Great party isn't it"

"It is indeed...except for your taste in music"

Him laughing "ah go away out of that"

Me..."seriously you have the musical taste of an 11 year old girl"

Him..."you're probably right"

I can't look him in the eye again.