Classic Rock Bottom

Question for everyone.Does a rocker's age matter to you? The purpose of this question is because people seem to contradict themselves on this. I remember when Judas Priest new album and tour came out, several people told me they wouldn't buy it because "Those guys are old. It is time to move on." I was surprised by how many people said that or claimed they wouldn't go see them live because their age. Yet, take someone like Ozzy Osbourne. Ozzy is no spring chicken (age is a part of life) and frankly has not been a good live singer or performer in years. Yet I rarely hear anyone complain about his age but if bands like the Moody Blues, Deep Purple, etc go on tour or record a new album, some of their longtime fans seem to have stopped supporting them because they are a little long in the tooth. Why is it that some bands/performers get a pass while others don't?

Views: 161

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I don't care about a rocker's age as long as they are putting out quality material. If I'm going to see them live, a quality performance would be nice as well.

But if age is affecting either one, it seems entirely reasonable to stop supporting them.

For the record, I loved the most recent Judas Priest album. And I liked the last Black Sabbath disc as well. The Sabbath concert I went to was good, despite Ozzy's mediocre at best performance. He was best on the newer material live because it was tailored to his abilities NOW as opposed to his younger days.

No.

A real fan will support a group no matter how old they might be. If they say they're a real fan but won't show any more support then they're a liar. 

Nope. It's all about the music!

Grace Slick on aging rockers....

  • I left rock and roll professionally at about 49. That’s too long as far as I’m concerned. Some people can do it; it depends on what you were. If you were pretty and young and wore short skirts and were busy trying to be sexy and all that shit at 25, it worked. If you’re 50, it doesn’t work quite as well.
  • You can do any number of things in the music business aside from trying to look like you’re 25. To me it’s embarrassing. I realized that during the 80s. In the 80s we weren’t writing our own songs. It was like being in L.A. rather than San Francisco. I like to write my own stuff or have the band members write their own stuff, and we weren’t doing that. I was in my 40s and I remember thinking, God, this is just awful. But I was such an asshole for a while, I was trying to make up for it by being sober, which I was all during the 80s, which is a bizarre decade to be sober in. So I was trying to make it up to the band by being a good girl. Here, we’re going to sing this song, “We Built This City on Rock & Roll.” Oh you’re shitting me, that’s the worst song ever. I could do it, I could get up and imitate myself, but that doesn’t feel right.

Me?  If they're viable and writing good stuff, I'm in!!  I think there are some out there who should hang it up, but plenty who still got something to offer!  Your example of Judas Priest is perfect, listen to that last album, whoa!  They're still writing great stuff.  Not that I want to see Halford in tight leather pants, nor Grace Slick in short skirt for that matter, but they got it.  ACDC is getting close, but they still put out great stuff.  Rock or Bust is surely no Back In Black, nor is it as good as Razors Edge, but its still better than most everything out there today.

I think Slick hit it on the head, song writing!  If you got it you have the longevity.  Starship wasn't writing there own stuff, *poof* unsustainable.  Styx is another perfect example, remove the key creative force and song writer and voila!  Cover band! and who wants to pay full price for that!?

Gowan left Styx? 

one could only hope....

I don't think, it has anything to do with age. For me, if it's they still make good music, and since I have to pay my money for either a concert or an album, it has to be good.

Since I've seen Judas Priest in 1986, when they still were on the top, or near it, and that they imo started to make bad albums from 1988 and on, I have no 2need" whatsoever seing that band again in 2016. I admit, that I don't know if each and every album they've released since are all bad, but also my taste in music developes, and since about the end of the 80's, I haven't have any need, listening to a new Judas Priest-album ever again. I know the bands music, and I love the great albums they released up until Turbo.

Judas Priest haven't "progressed" in to a better band, I DO follow music, so I think, I know what I like and don't like. 

Some artists like Bowie and Tom Waits try (or tried) to make new music with each new album, I that's why I would love to have seen either of those great artists any time at all.

Bands like Priest and Purple don't have anything new to say anymore (not to me at least), and are playing the same old hits again and again, or new songs from very uninteresting new albums, that sounds like the old albums, only worse.

I did enjoy seeing Sabbath a few years back, but that was because I hadn't seen the before, and they DID have an okay new album out, and it was the last chance I had to see them.

If I can, I prefer seeing bands at the top of their game, and not when they are old copies of themselves.

If someone woeul pay me money for it, I wouldn't go to a KISS-concert these days. Too old, and not KISS and no good new music.

KISS and U2 are the worst examples of bands once being great, but sucks now.

And if some dude won't call me a fan, then....whatever.

Sorry about the mis-spellings, but I don't have the time right now to correct any errors.

I was never a huge KISS fan but I agree. U2 is a good example. I will say (and I admit I am a fan) but Alice Cooper is still a great live act. Neil Young is still good too in my opinion.

Actually, I've never seen AC, but if I get the chance, I will definitley consider it. Not because he (imo) has made good music the last couple of decades (imho he peaked with the albums up until around 1977), but mainly because he has a reputation of being a great live-act, and he's one of the legends, I've never seen live. Also, since AC is one person, it's not like Deep Purple, that I also never have seen before, but I don't think, I would bother, even if they played 2 miles from where I live at a free concert. The reason being, that again imho, it ain't Purple without Blackmoore and Lord. If, on the other hand, Ian Gillan was playing a solo-concert, I would consider going. It's just like the band called Black Sabbath in the late 80's, where the only original member was Tony Iommi. Then the question is: Which members of a band is dispensable? When I saw Rolling Stones in 1990, I was glad that Wyman was still around. I wouldn't bother seeing Stones without him, as I wouldn't bother seeing AC/DC without Malcolm Young or Cheap Trick without Bun E. Carlos, but I DID see Sabbath without Ward a couple of years ago, and I would definitely see "Led Zeppelin" if they came to denmark or even Sweden, even though they haven't made a great album since 1975, and they are 70 years old. Why? Because they are the biggest legend of all (imo), and 3 members out of 4 are a pretty close call. (not in Cheap Trick's case, though).

These years, there have been some pretty good comeback-albums, if you can call them that, from bands, that (IMHO) were way past there best albums. Bands like AC/DC, Def Leppard, Iron Maiden and more, I can't think of now. I even suspect the new Cheap Trick-album to be pretty good. Still I wouldn't go see any of those bands, because a) I've seen them before, when they were younger and better (except for Cheap Trick, who I've had a concert-ticket for twice, but they cancelled each time) b) Some major-key members are not in the bands anymore (well, in Maiden there's one too many, and he's not a key-member) and c) even though they are suddently making a better album, than they maybe have made for 10-15 years, I do NOT expect myself listening to those albums in 10 years, but I probably will still listen to the great albums, they all released decades ago.

I just thought to myself: Would I had seen Cheap Trick in 1982-83 without Peterson on bass? Yes, most definitely.

So it's a question about how important is the band to you (me), but also how many (and which) original members are back, how long have the band been around without a break (is it a comeback or have they made more or less lousy albums for decades) but also how good is the latest album.......I guess?!

And finally, It's much easier for a solo-artist to get new members in "the band" without losing credabillity....in my opinion.

Lastly: I consider myself a fan of for example The Who, even though I don't think, they've made a good album since Moon died.

The same way, I consider myself a fan of Robert De Niro, even though I definitely don't like all his movies lately, and a fan of Jack Kirby, but only his work at Marvel in the 60's. So there.

I've seen Alice Cooper twice in concert and I have to agree that he is still a great live act.

RSS

Question Of The Week

CRB Features (Click photo to visit)

Birthdays

There are no birthdays today

CRB Staff Members

 

In Memory Of

Norma Jean Fox
(11/30/1945-9/7/2010)

Photos

  • Add Photos
  • View All

Videos

  • Add Videos
  • View All

Badge

Loading…

© 2024   Created by RJhog (Admin).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service