| February 9th, 2005 01:19 AM |
|
|
| corgi37 |
If they release a live cd after this next studio one, then i will be getting an ulcer.
SS - Yeah, i saw a few youngies at the Melb show nearly 2 years ago. Most brought by their parents. I saw heaps more youngies at the Who in July.
And, yes, it is a bit trendy to wear a Stones tongue t-shirt. Trouble is, most of the people wearing them have no idea its the bands logo.
Hillary Duff wears CBGB's t-shirts. Do you think she's ever been there? Do you think she knows what she is wearing? Or, as i heard a rumour, when asked about the t-shirt, she said: "Yeah, i really like their sound".
Britney Spears had no idea who Paul McCartney was.
The Stones have lost a generation of fans, simply by not releasing new stuff. Now, a whole generation of kids havent heard the Stones from their older siblings, unlike in other times.
I see the Stones playing more and more to a Jimmy Buffet type of crowd.
Hey, fine with me. I aint 20 anymore. |
| February 9th, 2005 01:39 AM |
|
|
| ResidentMule |
I can only speak for myself, but I'm 19 and a bigger Stones fan than any 40 year old I know. its not just a generational thing or even about the length of times between albums. I don't remember the Stones getting any more respect in 97 than they get now. I wouldn't be surprised if they hooked more new fans with Forty Licks than Bridges to Babylon either. that compilation was pretty fuckin big and young people who might've dismissed them earlier for Satisfaction as being their parents music might've finally given them a shot and said 'wait THEY did Honky Tonk Women' or 'hey this Under My Thumb song is pretty cool. but if your 16, just getting into the Stones (and say its 1997) - and your looking through the rack of what Stones CD's you wanna start off with, is B2B necessarily gonna start out your collection? I think Forty Licks wins here...
I just don't see the point in going on bitching that not having a new album is killing their career. if they ever really were an album band (when, in comparison to being a live band, they weren't, 1971 or now) they definitly aren't anymore. that's not what people see them as and it doesn't matter. not all bands need to be active like that for people to get into them. we've mentioned AC/DC a bunch of times. Since Bridges to Babylon, most people have probably only heard one AC/DC song (Stiff Upper Lip), whereas the Stones had "Don't Stop". I don't see AC/DC as having a big advantage there, and I think we can confirm that AC/DC at least isn't failing to find a youth market. |
| February 9th, 2005 06:49 PM |
|
|
| corgi37 |
I think most people would agree ac/dc wiped the Stones at that SARS show.
And, they didnt need Justin Timberlake to do it.
Good to see a 19 year old into the band. How many of your mates are into them? How many of your mates think you are mad?
Wrap yourself in cotton wool and bubble wrap, and dont drink and drive.
You are a rare beast, my young Jedi. |
| February 9th, 2005 07:15 PM |
|
|
| Sir Stonesalot |
I don't think he's all that rare. In fact there have been quite a few young people here posting.
And they know their shit too.
Mule, Child of the Moon, Moonisup, The Savage Young Xyzzy, Boomy, Prodigal Son...and those are just off the top of my head...there are probably many more that I just don't know their age.
Sure, they are far outnumbered by non-fans in their age group....but so am I, and I'm 38.
It's not the Stones or their music or the lack of new material....it's hip hop. In general, young people don't listen to rock n roll music, Stones or otherwise. And they weren't going to listen to rock n roll even if the Stones had released 4 albums in the last 8 years. That generation, in the US at least, is completely influenced by hip hop and rap. That is their gig. That is the sound that is dominant. And I don't give a shit.
All the more reason to just go with what YOU like for yourself. As long as YOU enjoy what YOU like, that is all that matters. I mean, who gives a fuck what some hack writer for some crappy music rag thinks about U2, The Rolling Stones, or The Beatles? The only thing that matters is what YOU think.
|
| February 9th, 2005 07:48 PM |
|
|
| ResidentMule |
loved the Stones since I was 8. granted, I've been known to make a few blaphemous statements on here that I think Satisfaction is overrated, and I'm cynical about some of the things like Ronnie's playing, but trust me, I've always been a Stones lover to the core. I have a few friends who like them I guess. I don't know, its hard to say. are you looking for a high school perspective or a college perspective, because I'm pretty familiar with both. if someone in high school who can dig older music, then they probably like the Stones, its one of those things. if they're the Hoobastank crowd than they'll probably just ignore it, but in my experience not a lot of people say 'that's gay' when they find out I like the Stones - its not like if you say Van Halen and they just look at you and say "my dad listens to them". Most everyone has enjoyed Sympathy For The Devil or Honly Tonk Women at one point or another, unless they are seriously against classic rock. I have friends my age who like the Stones a lot too, but like the Band and Gram Parsons even more - so they're definitly not typical either. the Doors for some reason, and Pink Floyd and Led Zeppelin have a pretty good gathering of high school listeners, its a bit of a phenomenon. I personally had next to zero exposure to ANY current music until I was around 13, but from the time I was 6 up until middle school it was all about Chuck Berry, Dylan, the Beatles, the Stones, and some jazz. now I listen to a lot of bands that were big back when I wasn't paying attention, STP, Tool, etc, but its still mostly about the Stones for me. that's stuff I got into in the middle of high school. college has broadened me out a LOT and I would imagnine it does to the same for most people. I doubt there's many people in college who have anything against the Stones
I actually never saw the AC/DC SARS performance. and I only saw the Stones doing Satisfaction, how they dragged that song out on the Licks tour was the worst part of it for me. I can't watch it on the MSG DVD, its mostly Lisa - even though overall I've had a pretty positive opinion of her
"young people don't listen to rock n roll music, Stones or otherwise. And they weren't going to listen to rock n roll even if the Stones had released 4 albums in the last 8 years."
oh, and SS just nailed it
people either dig the "scene" or they don't, it has little to nothing to do with the band. I try to stay away from 'scenes' as much as possible, like to me, all the early punk bands who pretty much founded the genre were very much a scene -- the Ramones, Sex Pistols etc. it was at a point where the main goal was to push your style of music and you have to pretty much go 100% in that direction to be revolutionary. that doesn't appeal to me, I just play what I want. I am anything but a classic rock guy who soaks up everything on the radio from between 1969-1978. |
| February 9th, 2005 10:07 PM |
|
|
| Soldatti |
quote:
Sir Stonesalot wrote:
It's not the Stones or their music or the lack of new material....it's hip hop. In general, young people don't listen to rock n roll music, Stones or otherwise. And they weren't going to listen to rock n roll even if the Stones had released 4 albums in the last 8 years. That generation, in the US at least, is completely influenced by hip hop and rap. That is their gig. That is the sound that is dominant. And I don't give a shit.
I said that years ago. Sadly, no BIG market for a new Stones' album: young people don't care, the Stones can play Stray Cat Blues, Loving Cup or Can't You Hear Me Knocking and the diehards are on heaven and casual people only wants warhorses. Ok, the new album will sell good the first months but who will remember the last Stones' album a year after? |
| February 10th, 2005 10:25 AM |
|
|
| ResidentMule |
I'm just hoping that everyone who wants them to try to make a big statement doesn't get their wish. it will just fall flat. if you think their going to come back and recapture the pop market out of nowhere like Santana, it will have to be completely out of luck, if not just completely impossible. I can't even imagine what an album overemphasizing on making a statement by the Stones would sound like. Santana had all his guests, but what are the Stones going to do? guests haven't been the answer, whether they're Waddy Watchel or Lenny Kravitz like from GITD. its a lot of fans' dream to have them try to do something without any backup support, but that's not going to make a difference to casual fans.
NOTHING will make this album like 1965 all over again, I will be very happy to get another album of the quality of Voodoo Lounge, and I'm not saying that to compromise, like "its the best we can hope for at this point" even though Voodoo Lounge and Love is Strong, not to mention the tour all did very well, I still don't consider the album a statement - but it was the right album for them to do for their time and place, just like Let It Bleed or Some Girls or every other classic Stones record. if an album didn't as well as expected in the 70's, do you think they said, 'Uh oh, we better go back to formula'? shit no, they just went ahead and did their thing, and came out with great albums like Black & Blue. and if they DID release Black & Blue so they could say to everybody "hey guys, guess what, we're a disco band" they probably could've done a little better than lyrics like 'Hot Stuff, Can't Get Enough' - I love the song but it doesn't beg to be taken seriously by everyone. the Stones have been successful all this time because they've learned to manipulate the trends for themselves. they didn't take them to a pop level, they just took them to a natural level for themselves. Some Girls may have been a response to the Sex Pistols, but most importantly, it was the STONES' response to the Sex Pistols, playing it just like it was their own music. and that's exactly what I want them to do this time around
however many other people like it is their own fucking business |
| February 10th, 2005 11:35 AM |
|
|
| Dan |
I am not even excited about a new album, and I wont even buy it until I hear a few songs so I am sure its not as bad as the new tracks on 40 Licks. |
| February 10th, 2005 07:44 PM |
|
|
| corgi37 |
I'm looking forward to their next new release very much.
Because it will be their last. |
| February 10th, 2005 09:37 PM |
|
|
| Soldatti |
quote:
corgi37 wrote:
I'm looking forward to their next new release very much.
Because it will be their last.
Studio album maybe, but we will have loads of unreleased stuff on few years. |
|
CHAT
ROOM aka THE FUN HOUSE] [
RESTROOMS]