That was actually one of their credos. That they wouldn’t tour without some new music to play and that they’d play at least half - at one time it was all except one song - of any new album.
For bands that should have stuck around linger, I’ll vote for a probably unexpected Dave Clark Five. They were almost as popular as The Beatles for about this||long, and they had some totally rocking songs. Not sure if they had enough depth to keep going without changing themselves into something different, though.
And Led Zep was a good mention. I thought In Through The Out Door was probably their best complete album at least since IV.
As for stating too long - I don’t have any problem with The Stones. I’m not out there buying all that much of their new stuff, but I’m glad they’re offering it. I’d rather listen to them try something new than yet another album from The Pretentious Wankers. I mean U2.
I would have been happy if U2 had packed in it at War. I think success ruined them.
I just read an interview with Billy Joel that has some bits that reminded me of this thread.
That’s funny.
Is BJ always so cynical? I only know the music, not the man, and was kind of surprised he would say those sort of things…
BJ made a nice reference to Yes lyrics though:
“…Or Yes: What the fuck are they talking about?..”
Said a few nice things about them too…
In context (for those who won’t read the article), he was talking about how he didn’t care as much about his own lyrics as Springsteen cared about his, and how not understanding the lyrics didn’t matter if the music was good.
Cynical would be “What I’m doing is stupid.” Acknowledging how awesome his job is isn’t cynical, it’s smart.
It’s like John Lennon and Paul McCartney talking about how they’d sit down to write songs and say “Let’s write some new swimming pools.” It’s refreshingly honest.
That’s funny, that was kind of what I saw when I went to a Carole King concert a few years ago (well, more than a few). Well, no bulletproof glass, and she did play and sing, so nobody threw shit. She called it The Living Room Tour.
But what’s the point of hanging it up?
If you’re just in it for they money and the fame, and you’ve got the money and fame, then sure, quit while you’re ahead.
But a lot of those old bands wanted to play music. And by touring as some band that people have heard of, they get to keep getting up on stage and play music for a live audience. If that’s what you want to do, then great for them. The only problem of course is that if you’re touring under the name of some old band that people have heard of, then your audience wants you to play the songs they’ve heard of, and they want those songs to sound like the old recordings. So no getting up on stage in 2018 and playing the music you want to play in the style you want to play, you’re your own cover band and have to play music from the hit album of 1982 in the 1982 style.
But hasn’t TB (along with the majority of jazz vocalists) always sung in a relatively comfortable range for the majority of his career? No surprise that mellow Mel and peacefully pleasant Perry went on forever.
Totally agree.
(to quote this one completely the frick out of context)
Squire used to get on Anderson’s case about the vapid abstruseness of his lyrics.
That is a good thing.
And, as a result:
…was what I applied to Yes’s music. (I think my favourite stinker was “I hear the total mass re-tain!”
Have I seen “cover” and “tribute” used differently in this thread? I myself define “cover” as simply playing another group’s stuff, while “tribute” is covering, plus the look of the group they’re covering.
And simply that.
I blame Beatlemania, myself.
They’re only human. Who among us, if offered the chance to make a good living without breaking a sweat, trying or thinking too hard, and not having to put ourselves out at all, would turn it down?
I recall an interview with some of the members of Kansas where they said that, in one concert, they decided to have fun with “Dust in the Wind,” playing it like a rap song. They were apparently confronted by a fan after the concert who was just devastated at what they did to a song that was so meaningful to her. So they’re kind of stuck with not being able to change things around even if they wanted to.
Much as I love Yes, I’d be more than happy to never hear Roundabout again. When I saw Yes with Benoit David, by far the best part was hearing the songs from “Drama” that they hadn’t played since that tour. When I saw them next with Jon Davidson, the gimmick was that they were playing the full “Fragile” and “Close to the Edge” albums, and the main thing I got out of that is that Davidson doesn’t quite have the chops to give South Side of the Sky or Heart of the Sunrise the power it needs.
As for other bands, we’ve gotten this far without anyone mentioning post-Freddy Mercury Queen?
One big deterrent for classic rock releasing new stuff is that there’s no money in it. It costs a lot to record and produce a CD–so much so that performers will end up paying more money to create and release a CD than they would ever make from sales. And streaming royalties are miniscule–hard to make a profit unless you have a mega hit with tons of downloads.
Besides that, when classic rock groups go out on tour, people want to hear the old hits. They either haven’t heard or don’t care about new material. It’s a common meme that concert goers start heading for the bathroom or snack bar when the band starts playing their new material.
Gigging musicians might be well-known, even popular, but not earning that much money. People assume that if they’ve got a record on the radio and they are filling pubs that they are necessarily rolling in dough, but there are costs involved in playing. You have to hire the PA system, pay the mixer, pay the roadies, etc. What you actually end up with might not be that much.
Arena concerts have costs that are astronomical. Carting huge PA systems around costs a LOT of money and you haven’t just got a few roadies and a mixer to pay, you’ve got hundreds of people on the payroll. The truckies, riggers, lots of sound guys, etc etc etc. Your beyonces and your pinks who can sell out those arenas should/will cover those costs, but if they don’t sellout, the artist might not end up with much from the show.
These bands playing county fairs are just doing their jobs. Professional musicians don’t have “day jobs”. If they aren’t old enough, or ready for retirement, then they play whatever gigs they are offered. I can’t fault any of them for continuing to work, even if I think they don’t have the “spark” they did when they were younger and more popular or had “better” performers in the group.
All unfortunately true. Tom Petty kept releasing new albums (some of which were pretty good, IMO), but I always wondered where, if anywhere, they got any airplay.
Lots of Starbucks.
With turntables.
Until relatively recently, Queen really hadn’t done very much after Freddie’s death, and the tribute concert. In the 90s, they finished up one last album of music that Freddie had worked on, and that’s when John Deacon decided to retire.
Brian May and Roger Taylor toured some with Paul Rodgers from 2005-2008, and they recorded an album. In the past few years, they’ve been touring again with Adam Lambert, and they’ve always taken pains to stress that Adam isn’t, in any way, “replacing” Freddie. I’ve seen them play twice with Lambert; he has a very different voice from Freddie, but they put on a great show, and both Brian and Roger are still strong performers. At least in the eyes of this longtime Queen fan, they haven’t “stayed around too long.”
Supposedly, Anderson wouldn’t sing others’ songs. For a new age-y type, he apparently has quite the ego and has rubbed his bandmates the wrong way on more than a few occasions.
And, Steve Howe is apparently not a fan of playing on songs on which he wasn’t the original guitarist – I’ve read that “Owner of a Lonely Heart” is about the only Rabin-era song on which he’ll play in concert, and even then, he’s not happy about it.
There’s no doubt that there are / were a number of big egos in the group. My suspicion is that Squire may have been the only one with whom everyone else got along.