ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board


WEBRADIO CHANNELS:
[Ch1: Sike-ay-delic 60's] [Ch2: Random Sike-ay-delia] [Ch3: British Invasion]

[THE WET PAGE] [IORR NEWS] [SETLISTS 62-99] [THE A/V ROOM] [THE ART GALLERY] [MICK JAGGER] [KEITHFUCIUS] [CHARLIE WATTS ] [RON WOOD] [BRIAN JONES] [MICK TAYLOR] [BILL WYMAN] [IAN STEWART ] [NICKY HOPKINS] [MERRY CLAYTON] [LISA FISCHER] [DARRYL JONES] [BOBBY KEYS] [JAMES PHELGE] [LINKS] [PHOTOS] [MAGAZINE COVERS] [MUSIC COVERS ] [JIMI HENDRIX] [BOOTLEGS] [TEMPLE] [GUESTBOOK] [ADMIN]

[CHAT ROOM aka THE FUN HOUSE] [RESTROOMS]

NEW: SEARCH ZONE:
Search for goods, you'll find the impossible collector's item!!!
Enter artist an start searching using "Power Search" (RECOMMENDED) inside.
Search for information in the wet page, the archives and this board:

PicoSearch

ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board
Register | Update Profile | F.A.Q. | Admin Control Panel

Topic: Wash Post's Segal Slags Stones...Again Return to archive
02-28-02 10:02 AM
sandrew "With its recent harvest of Grammys, U2 has made pop history. No other band has remained commercially popular and, for the most part, critically acclaimed for even a fraction of this group's 20-plus years. The recording career of the Beatles lasted about a third as long, and two decades into the Rolling Stones' uneven life the band was releasing deservedly forgotten albums like 'Dirty Work.'"

So writes David Segal in today's Washington Post. This guy has an animus against the Stonse. Since D.C. is a small town - and definitely not a music town - he's one of only a handful of prominent music writers. So I read him pretty frequently. He's never had a good thing to say about the Stones. You can only imagine what he DOES like - i.e., crap.
02-28-02 10:30 AM
nankerphelge As a fellow member of the DC area, it comes as no surprise that a Post music "critic" is so biased against the Stones. Music alone is not enough for these guys (if it were the whole U2 Popmart thing would have killed the discussion) -- in order to be "in" you have to have an (excuse the pun) "edge." That is, a message against third world debt, or rain forrests, or some other cause du jour. And it seems more and more that singing about it ain't enough -- as a musician, commitment to a cause must spill over into actual action -- meeting with the Pope and shit.

While Jagger once flexed his musical influence for non-musical pursuits, he has been much happier of late plugging Brazilan, Italian, and other ethnic holes. And the fact that the Stones have put out far better material in the last 10 years than the much maligned Dirty Work (ie Voodoo Lounge, Stripped), they are still seen by the so-called critics as carrying the corporate sell-out message.

Hey whatever, these idiots and those that actually buy such crap won't be in the ticket line and that is fine with me.
02-28-02 10:32 AM
patioaintdry yes -- I'm stuck reading this jerks opinions all the time in DC. Critics are insecure, frustrated, untalented jack-offs. Segal continues with: "How has U2 done it? Over the years, it's had enough nerve to change its sound, often from the ground up and occasionally in ways that put it at the vanguard of pop's evolution . . ."

In my humble opinion, U2 changes their sound much like Billy Joel and Garth Brooks do. They haven't released anything worthwhile since '87's Joshua Tree. And Segal is historically incorrect when it comes to the Stones. I believe 1963 throughg 1981 constitues 2 decades of being "commercially popular and critically acclaimed"
02-28-02 10:39 AM
nankerphelge Are you also in the DC area? Man, this place is crawling with people of our ilk...
02-28-02 10:46 AM
patioaintdry And our ilk continue to crave a decent radio station and record store in the Capitol of the Free World. There's probably better music available in Kabul.
02-28-02 10:52 AM
nankerphelge Yeah -- I gave up on DC radio years ago. When I first moved here in the late 80s, I bounced from 101 to HFS, to 98 out of Baltimore. But over time I just lost all interest -- I do better with a blank tape. There is a pretty good station out of Annapolis, but I don't get it very well.

As for record stores, it is just plain sad. Every once and awhile the hotel just south of the Beltway on route 1 (Hampton Inn maybe) has a CD convention -- but I've always missed it. Bet that has some stuff.

Thank god for my Stonesian kin here who keep me stocked with fine materials. "Blessed are the bootmakers for they shall inherit the chiba"
02-28-02 10:56 AM
Zanck
But...what about the Nicaragua benefit of '73!!!
He forgot about that didn't he??(and also the Toronto blind concert!!)
lol
02-28-02 11:39 AM
Maxlugar Also, lets not forget the almost realized Concert for the Deaf in '86.

That was the year they put out music so hard rockin' and powerful that even the deaf could hear it.

The album?

Dirty Work.

They never get credit for that.

But for now...

I gotta Jet, Bail and hit the trail!

Buh-bye!

Maxlugar
02-28-02 11:46 AM
marko And concert in oakland-89 for the victims of earthquake.
02-28-02 12:39 PM
Cardinal Ximinez And let's not forget about the Concert For New York City!

Music critics are people who can't play music, or if they do, failed at it. Those who play, play...those who can't play, listen...those who can't play, and don't listen, write about it.
02-28-02 01:00 PM
nankerphelge How about the "2002 concert for the Stoned"

Oh I like it -- it has all those hidden meanings -- people who like the Stones can be the "stoned" - or people that like chiba can be the "stoned" - it sounds very humanitarian but is in fact tongue (get it) in cheek.

If they call this tour the concerts for the stoned I swear to god I will go to every show.

02-28-02 01:07 PM
Maxlugar Awesome Nanky!

We are soooooo there.

02-28-02 01:31 PM
lucasd U2's new album is very good, but these people forget that the two albums before that were terrible...U2 have not exactly been consistent for 20 years...who remembers POP or ZOOROPA?? How many grammy nominations/awards did those clunkers recieve?? How many people can name one song from either one of them?? Yes, they've released some great music, but to compare them with the Beatles and the Stones is absurd...thev're released three great albums, at the most--WAR, JOSHUA TREE, and ACHTUNG BABY...and none of those were in the league of the Stones or Beatles best...the Beatles did a lot more in their short existence than U2 will do in a 40 year career....The Stones '64-'78 will never be topped, period....Finally, I'll take DIRTY WORK over at least half of U2's output....
02-28-02 04:14 PM
gimmekeef The DC is a friggin jerk.Music critics are pathetic anyway and serve no purpose.You either like something or you don't and no one will change your personal opinion.Let's face it U2 are a damn fine band most of the time but they made sure to get their tour out of the way and leave 2002 to the MASTERS!
02-28-02 04:42 PM
Gazza >With its recent harvest of Grammys, U2 has made pop history. No other band has remained commercially popular and, for the most part, critically acclaimed for even a fraction of this group's 20-plus years. The recording career of the Beatles lasted about a third as long, and two decades into the Rolling Stones' uneven life the band was releasing deservedly forgotten albums like 'Dirty Work'

Absolute wank!

Theres a world of difference between longevity and output. I'm a fan of all 3 bands,but lets get it into perspective. In the first 20 years of U2's career they released 10 albums of original material (Boy,October,War,Unforgettable Fire, Joshua Tree,Rattle & Hum - only about half of which was original material - Achtung Baby,Zooropa,Pop,All that you cant leave behind)

In the space of 7 years (1963 - 70) The Beatles released ELEVEN albums of studio material in the UK - one of which was a double album (I'm excluding Yellow submarine and Magical Mystery Tour because it was only issued in the US and was essentially an EP plus a colection of A and B-sides from 1967) - and that figure excludes several groundbreaking singles which didnt feature on albums. Thats one more album than U2 managed in a period three times as long. (I'm using the UK releases instead of the US ones because a lot of the early US albums were isued after the UK releases and featured bonus tracks not previously available in the US)

In the first 20 years of THEIR career,the Rolling Stones issued 17 studio albums in the UK - and 19 in the US (I'm excluding "Flowers" as its primarily a compilation and "Metamorphosis" as its not freshly recorded material)- again,that figure doesnt even take into account non-album singles.

critical acclamation also means fuck all..it wasnt until the late 70's that the Grammys started taking rock music seriously (they even dropped rock'n'roll as a category for a few years in the 60's!!). Even Dylan never won a Grammy until 1980 and I doubt the Beatles did either. I mean,1964 will be remembered as the year The Beatles stormed America (with the Stones and the rest of the British invasion not far behind..) Record Of the Year : "The Girl From Ipanema" by Astrid Gilberto.
02-28-02 05:19 PM
Joey "The recording career of the Beatles lasted about a third as long, and two decades into the Rolling Stones' uneven life the band was releasing deservedly forgotten albums like 'Dirty Work.'"

Did U2 ever release a " Dirty Work " ??????

J J J J JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJoey

J Joeyfly !




02-28-02 05:24 PM
Gazza Yeah - "Pop"
02-28-02 09:31 PM
Maxlugar Listen you two, if U2 ever dreams they can rock like Dirty Work they better wake up apologizing.

I don't care if The Edge took three months to overdub his guitar parts, he can NEVER get a weave going like on Fight.

They have some incredible songs but U2 is not in the same class as The Rolling Stones. The only reason they are talked up these days is for the longevity. Bono's political causes are scrotum shriveling too.

02-28-02 10:43 PM
nankerphelge Bono is a fucking dick

After Joshua Tree, Bono became an abolsute ego maniac

The Stones are so far above any band including U2 it is an insult to even have to explain it.

Heard Paint it Black at a Boston bar tonite

awesome - simply awesome
02-28-02 11:22 PM
Cardinal Ximinez The Stones played "Paint It Black" so well at the 1st DC show on the NS Tour. My heart almost exploded by the end of the song.
03-01-02 11:47 AM
Joey Agreed . At the April 6th , 1999 NS show in Kansas City , Jagger's performance on Paint it Black was so mesmerizing , no one could take their eyes off of him for just one second . Incredible . 20,000 of us going nuts !!!!!!

" I can not wait for the next tour Ronnie "


Joey , C10




03-01-02 12:02 PM
TomL
quote:
patioaintdry wrote:
And our ilk continue to crave a decent radio station and record store in the Capitol of the Free World. There's probably better music available in Kabul.



Amen, we need a station here. All crap.

On June 16, 2001 the hit counter of the WET page was inserted here, it had 174,489 hits. Now the hit counter is for both the page and the board.
The hit counter of the ITW board had 1,127,645 hits when it was closed and the Coolboard didn't have hit counter but was on line only two months and a half.