ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board


Cover of our boot!
Exclusive Pic provided by Moy!!

WEBRADIO CHANNELS:
[Ch1: Bill German's Stones Zone] [Ch2: British Invasion] [Ch3: Sike-ay-delic 60's] [Ch4: Random Sike-ay-delia]


[THE WET PAGE] [IORR NEWS] [IORR TOUR SCHEDULE] [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] [IAN 'MAC' McLAGAN] [BERNARD FOWLER] [LISA FISCHER] [DARRYL JONES] [BOBBY KEYS] [JAMES PHELGE] [CHUCK LEAVELL] [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: Successors to the Stones crown? Return to archive Page: 1 2 3
09-27-02 03:06 PM
hotlicks In my humble opinion, the Rolling Stones are the best rock n' roll band to ever walk the planet. Let's get that fact straight. But here's an idea for you; what contemporary
bands are worthy successors to the Stones?

The Queens of the Stone Age and Black Rebel Motorcycle Club's albums have been two of the best rock CDs i've heard for a good few years, and i feel that their music is as driving, decadent, sexual and just too goddamn rocking
to be ignored. However, I don't share the same enthusiasm for The Vines, The Strokes and The White Stripes. Though that singer from the Hives has clearly picked up a few moves from Sir Mick....though I can't see their shelf life lasting. What's everyone's else's opinions on good contemporary rock bands?
[Edited by hotlicks]
09-27-02 04:13 PM
Harrylime If you like BRMC you should checkout The Jesus and Mary
Chain ,because they seem to have borrowed an awful lot from
them,and sound very similar,though not as good.
09-27-02 04:39 PM
Factory Girl My fave by Jesus & Mary Chain is "Automatic" CD. But, also check out "Darklands." I saw JMC live a while back, but was turned off by the "wall-of-sound" they had going live. I think they ceased to exist 7-8 years ago?
09-27-02 04:55 PM
Moonisup I don't think it is no longer possible to last 40 years! No band can match that, the stones will not stop touring after this one, they will tour different.
No band can match the stones, they'll rock till they drop!
09-27-02 05:13 PM
Factory Girl Hey Moonsupie! Yep, the Stones have a unique chemistry, plus they were so prolific for a while, anyway.

Iggy Pop has been at it for 37-38 years with and without the Stooges. He's not a band, but damn he fucking rocks!! I saw him again in 2001, and he was Kicking Ass! He's a True Motor City Madman!!
09-27-02 05:29 PM
Moonisup iggy pop is nice

Stones are better

ROLLING STONES ===> RULE
09-27-02 08:09 PM
Lacride The Stones are a UNICUM of the century, just as Presley was or the Beatles. No other band can succeed them. Who succeeded Marylin or Jimi? Noone. Other bands may be great, very great: they won't replace the Stones.
09-27-02 08:46 PM
lin Saw queens of the stone age on letterman few weeks back, boy I nearly fell asleep, one of the most boring live performances (and song) I've seen. the lead singer has ZERO appeal. the vines, hives, stripes, god who cares. the lead singer of vines is truly awful.

The only "new" group that is great is RAMMSTEIN - fuck they are good.

I think to reach the stones heights, (and mick jagger became larger than life) you also need a sexy lead singer or someone who has charisma. A band like incubus has potential, sexy lead singer, solid rock songs, but look how long it took them to make good music, 10 years or so.
09-28-02 04:05 AM
dead man cum Ok, what about the Black Crowes? I know, they have been around for ten years or so, but let's face it - they reference they hell out of the stones and faces, have an undeniable swagger, and have never compromised into a bunch of commercial schlock in an area when that is all the music industry wanted. Granted, none of the individual members has the stand-out appeal of jagger/richards, but you have to admit that the Crowes are about as true to the roots as any band that's come on line in the last decade. Just some thoughts.....
Terry
09-28-02 08:49 AM
RubyFriday Black Crowes........pleaseeee......Noooo

There�s a new vote on:

http://rollingstone.com/

for this question (and the results - so far - show the only answer.....
09-28-02 09:42 AM
full moon I second the Black Crowes!!!
09-28-02 09:53 AM
padre There's a great band in Finland called Flaming Sideburns, which plays this now so very popular garage rock, but with a touch Stones in them. They have a track called Flowers (from their latest album Hallelujah Rock'n'Rollah), which would've been AWESOME for the Stones to record. Better than any of the new tracks on Licks. I can send an mp3 of it for you if any of you are interested. Gimme your email address in private messages. I strongly recommend. The track is good.
09-28-02 10:33 AM
The Eggman NO NO QUEENS OF THE STONE AGE!

Fucking awesome song!!!
09-28-02 11:15 AM
ray Black Crowes
Sheryl Crow

They come closest to the Stones, although of course not as succesful.

I guess other bands mentioned in this thread don't even know what a bottleneck is or they have never heard of Gram Parsons...
09-28-02 11:19 AM
Sir Stonesalot I thought the Black Crowes hung it up, and called it a day?
09-28-02 11:25 AM
ray Yeah, Black Crowes are on hiatus as they call it. How do you actually call the '87 -'88 period for the Stones in Stones' terms?
[Edited by ray]
09-28-02 12:38 PM
KeepRigid 'Want to be the Greatest Rock n Roll band in the world? Just come up with something better than these albums.' -Blender magazine, reviewing the new remasters

'Come up with something better, and we'll get out of the way.' - Keith
09-28-02 01:05 PM
stonesmik Artists like Johnny Thunders, the Black Crowes or Sheryl Crow are surely no successors, they're simply epigones. They're nice but they're not better and especially they don't offer any innovation.

Like there is on successor for Elvis Presley or the Beatles, there is no successor for the Rolling Stones. These are dinosaurs that can't be bettered. Besides it is very doubtful if a rock artist can ever become that influential again as these three once were, simply because rock and even punk/heavy metal/hardcore nowadays are accepted parts of the establishment that play some music and work for their money. There is no revolution in sight, neither sexual nor anti-establishment. No revolution, no icon. Being just excellent musicians is not what makes Elvis, the Beatles and the Stones what they are.
09-28-02 01:42 PM
Lacride That's the point Stonesmik! With a "revolution" we'll get new icons. But I'm afraid we'll have to wait long, very long, about two centuries. The last revolution - before ours - was "Le si�cle des Lumi�res", 18th century...
09-29-02 01:49 AM
padre What amazes me is that I've got friends who dig Crowes or Crow very much but cannot stand the Stones. I just don't geddit. Anybody else got similar experiences? And one thing even worse: I've got a friend who thinks that the only decent song in the Stones catalogue is Anybody Seen My Baby. Really! And he still is a a very close frind to me!
09-29-02 08:25 AM
stonesmik It may well be they see in the Stones better what they really are - unlike to us who are a bit addicted and still think of the Stones as icons. Leaving away all the history and the whole back catalogue the Rolling Stones are not the most impressing band today when you only look at their most recent output.

But then again it may help if you tell these Stones "haters" that both the Black Crowes and Sheryl Crow love the Stones and have openly expressed their admiration. They both have been supporting acts for the Stones. The Black Crowes have covered "Can't you hear me knocking", "Happy", "Honky tonk women", "Silver train", "Torn and frayed" and "Wild horses". They had Ronnie Wood with them on stage for "Statesboro blues". Meanwhile Sheryl Crow has covered "Happy", "Let it bleed", "Bitch" and "Honky tonk women", played several times with Keith Richards and Ronnie Wood and in 1994 even on stage with all of Rolling Stones ("Live with me"). She is a big Keith fan and in fact when I first heard the opening of "My favorite mistake" back in the 1990s when I didn't know nothing about this bride I really thought, cool, this is the new Stones single!

If nothing helps, tell them: F-u-c-k, y-o-o.
09-29-02 08:47 AM
Moonisup just say:

50 years of music, it started around 1952, I mean music as we know it, Chuck berry, Elvis, well you now what I mean

40 years of Rolling stones, people born after 1962 don't know a world without the stones!! Well maybe if you're living in the Bush Bush, But you know what I mean!

rik
09-29-02 02:21 PM
Dan I dont see any successor to the Stones. I dont see any bands lasting for 40 years. Also, bands are rarely allowed to release more than an album every 2 years so it would be near impossible to build up such a massive catalog in such a short period of time.

I wouldnt put a third rate knockoff like the Black Crowes in the same category as the Stones.

My favorite bands of the last 5 years or so are Supergrass and Rammstein, although Rammstein's last album was just sorta okay but their live show is amazing!

09-29-02 05:00 PM
Pants Make the Man It will have to be a band that can churn out radio hit's and at the same time still have some cachet, or credibility, with the undeground. The Stones and the Beatles stand alone, in that respect.
09-29-02 06:32 PM
RubyFriday Rammstein....the worst band of all time compared with the Stones.......huh.......What comes next? Michael Jackson,Prince,Weezer or Britney?
09-29-02 08:08 PM
lin Rammstein are great!

a band like radiohead are surely on their way to becoming as legendary as the stones, plus they have the respect of critics and fellow artists.
09-29-02 08:34 PM
parmeda Sorry folks...

But in my opinion, there isn't a baseball bat big enough for any other band to carry into The Stones' ball park. It will never happen, not in this lifetime at least.

Enjoy this while you still can...
09-29-02 09:34 PM
Pants Make the Man Eminem is more legendary than Radiohead, for fucks sake. "Kid-A" is severely overrated. Compared to the Stones Big Four, "Kid-A" is a total piece of shite. Just to put it in perspecive, will Radiohead be playing stadium's 30 years from now? Nobody is taking the Stones place.
09-29-02 10:08 PM
Boomhauer I think the Stones are the last band EVER to play football stadiums. No one will ever make it to a football stadium again.

And that lead singer from the Vines needs to do something about his face when he sings. He looks like an ass when he's singing "Get FRee", with that "I wanna geh freh" shit. He looks like an idiot and sounds like one with that screaming.

No successors to the Stones. Period!
09-29-02 10:16 PM
Rescued Pants Make The Man is correct that tha Stones will never be equalled. But I agree with other posters that good rock is still being created. Some of my favorite examples are: Black Rebel Motorcycle Club, Distillers, White Stripes, Radiohead, Strokes, and the Hives.

"Buh, buh, buh, because I wanna!"

Johnny Thunders died in 1991. If anybody wants an incredibly blistering and unPC document of what Thunders could do in spite of his addictions - get "Stations of the Cross"! He works in snippets of "Spider and the Fly" and makes a cool reference to the song "Emotional Rescue" within a mindblowing, ferocious set. "He took it all too far, but boy could he play guitar".
Page: 1 2 3