Our Heroes are Limping into the Sunset

[ch willie]

AC / DC is selling out their current tour, when half the band are replacement pros. Foreigner is what, only one original member;? I love Robert Plant's voice, but his solo stuff is so inferior to his work with LZ; Chicago is gutted; Kiss--you know; McCartney is a juke box; Clapton's too ready to retire to invest himself in new and interesting music; The Who have lost its backbone. Black Sabbath, The Stones (miss Bill Wyman's playing), and with Chris Squire's death and the loss of Jon Anderson, Yes is a tribute band. Dylan wants to be Sinatra.

It's not to say that any of the bands are bad. But I'm saddened to see the watering down of what was a spectacular age of creativity.

As I enter the final years of "middle-aged man," I understand the urge to slow down, to rely on a legacy rather than work toward discovery as they did back in the day, when you waited for so many albums, knowing you'd hear a new exploration into what music could be, how perfect and imperfect rock and roll could be.

I suppose the hunger is no longer there. I am trying not to think that it's all about raking in the dosh. I mean, I saw McCartney last year, and he put his soul into it. But there's no sense that anything he'll do will live up to even the best of Wings. I'm not blaming him. His past is hard to live up to. He loves to perform, and writing is his day job, so he keeps putting out albums, and they're all good, but none is groundbreaking. When you've broken so much ground, a smooth way might be a relief to you.

I am not criticizing these artists. It's all understandable. It's just sad to watch things go this way.

[S. Cane]

I agree, although I think some of the assertives are a bit too bitter.

For instance, I've seen Paul McCartney live a couple of years ago and I wouldn't call him a jukebox... I think he does the best he can without the other Beatles, too bad they broke up. Many people bash on Guns and Roses, I think 80% of the people you ask are going to tell you that Axl can't sing anymore and the band sucks, but that's not so true. I've seen them live last year too (with Dizzy and Duff), and it was a great show, although as a fan I did miss Slash's style... Maybe I'm a tad more tolerant than you with crippled bands.

But there's something I consider even worse than losing members. It's disagreement.

I hate the fact that Page, Plant and Jones are still there, and they have the best replacement possible for John, his own son. And they refuse to make Led Zeppelin exist again. Damn, the last reunion was a total rock and roll sledgehammer into this bloody "pop divas" era. They could be great again if they wanted to. But you ask them in any interview about a possible gathering, and they say they are busy.

At least black sabbath is touring again.

[pc]

I'm not so sure. The Stones aren't limping into anything. I saw them two months ago at Ohio Stadium, truly with only the intent to say that I did--I figured they were about done and I wanted to be able to say I saw the last tour.

Instead I was completely bowled over. The energy level that band puts out rivals or tops any group of 20-somethings I've seen lately. I've seen hundreds of live shows in my day and I'm just being honest when I say the Stones aren't my favorite band, but it was far and away the best live show I have ever seen. Ever.

One other comment from the "My two cents" database. I saw Cheap Trick and Peter Frampton two weeks ago. Although Bun E. Carlos was such a character, Rick Nielson's son is all the drummer that band needs and more. Robin Zander's voice is still nailing those high notes and I must say that Tom Petersson's 12-string bass (say what?) sounded like bass, rhythm guitar and keyboard all at the same time. Very cool.

Rick Nielson though was 100% gimmick and almost 0% ability. I fear age has possibly thrown him some arthritis problems, but his "solos" were just random, atonal, arrhythmic smatterings of notes that bore no resemblance to his prior abilities. Yet for each song, a completely different guitar with varying types of weird finishes or multiple numbers of necks was handed to him, and his arrogance in addressing the audience was pretty stunning given that he couldn't play anything musical on any of them.

Contrast that with Frampton, who instead of trying to dress like a 17-year-old, came out in jeans and a t-shirt--albeit a Humble Pie t-shirt. He was laid back, friendly, changed guitars only when it was musically appropriate to do so, and played like a complete monster. He was amazing, allowing his solos to creep further and further outside the chord changes of the songs he's done a zillion times by now in a way I would have to define as jazz. His band was fantastic too. Cheap Trick's 80 minutes felt like a day and a half, and Frampton's 80 minutes felt like 45 seconds.

That was a long enough post that I should probably pretend to have a point. I suppose it was this: Dear rockstars, if you still love the music as much (or more) than you love getting paid to play it, it will always be a great show no matter how old you are. If you are truly limping into the sunset, do us all a favor and stop playing so we can remember you the way you want us to.

[Drops mic, walks off stage.]

[Feels bad about dropping mic, returns to pick it up and check windscreen for dents, then replaces it on mic stand]

[Cogs]

I agree & disagree, lol
Most of the bands you mention, I wouldn't walk across the street to see at the local VFW. Dylan does whatever he wants; if he wants to be Sinatra, then Sinatra better move over
McCartney? MAybe a juke box, but I'd listen to him all day. The Grateful Dead have called it quits but not before they seeded themselves into so many bands that the phenomenon is guaranteed another 25 years, at least. The "Grateful Dead" haven't really been together since Jerry died, & some say since Pig.

[ch willie]

Understand that I really love all these bands. I still buy everything McCartney records. Hell I even listen to the overly productive Neil Young, who's very hit and miss. A lot of them are out there swinging in a live setting, but if they're putting out original music, it's no longer an exploration or a thing of art, at least not in the way albums used potentially to be.

A group like the Stones are still great players and do a great job of performing, same with bands like Cheap Trick. I loved the last Stones studio album, but it wasn't their best, wasn't even close.

I miss the age of experimentation. I miss the hunger a lot of these bands had.

And yeah, I hate it that Plant, Page, and Jones can't get it together. I'd love to hear new music from them.

[Cogs]

Well what's trending on Facebook right now is the Slash/Axl feud is over, & about 50/50 on whether it means more cool music or "who cares?"
lol

[Doc W]

People get old. I am getting old too! I used to be a very aggressive, very loud overdrive kind of player. My main amp is now a PR and a custom tweed. I play mostly very very clean. People change, tastes change.

There are lots of younger musicians out there full of p*ss and vinegar. Let them have their day.

A final note: one of the most beautiful versions of "Autumn Leaves" I have ever heard is Clapton's. Give it a listen. His singing his deep. He, like me, sees falling leaves.

[Cogs]

I think I'll go w/the Bob Berg/Mike Stern version of that tune:

[S. Cane]

The Stones are a perfect example of how a band can stay good for 50 years. And counting.

[Doc W]

I think I'll go w/the Bob Berg/Mike Stern version of that tune:

That's the thing about taste. Everyone's is different. I like the Clapton because of the quality of his voice and the way he expresses the profound sadness of the song. The Stern version is, for me, a totally different thing. They are playing the changes and making some nice music but I don't think they get at the depth of the song. It's about DEATH!

In terms of jazz versions, my fave is still the one with Miles Davis and Cannonball Adderly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsz6TE6t7-A

[ch willie]

I think Clapton's voice has gotten better with age. He has become a great singer over the years. I like his version of Autumn Leaves. I "like" all of his stuff but haven't been over the top about anything he's put out since Reptile.

[ch willie]

I've thought a lot about my OP today. It is a rather bitter posting.

Actually, I guess Chris Squire's death has affected me more than the usual celeb death does. I listen to things in cycles, and I've been listening to a lot of Yes lately, marveling at Chris Squire's and Steve Howe's work. I had especially been listening to Squire's bass a lot before they announced he had a rare and deadly cancer. I've never been a Squire fan in the way that I'm a Beatles / McCartney or Clapton fan, but I've always enjoyed his work. The Going for the One album has always been important to me, and I saw them on that tour. I was totally into Ric basses, wanted one so badly, and it was the first time I'd ever heard one played live. Squire came out on stage and looked 10' tall. He was holding the Ric by the strap, arm down and the Ric was still high off the ground. When I hear a Squire-type tone out of my Ric, it has always given me a thrill.

So, you know, the greats are dying one by one, and I remember when they were young and vital. And each time, I feel a great sadness. The loss of George Harrison still saddens me--his last album, btw, was excellently written and played. And even though I may not get a stiffy over McCartney's new albums, I dread the day when I no longer have a new McCartney album to look forward to.

But I'm willing to be sunny and say that I'll enjoy them while they're still around, and I'll try not to be too critical of them. After all, their worst is better than a lot of other artists' best.

I am looking forward to new ones by David Gilmour, Keef, and when he gets to it, whatever Jimmy Page will put out. And I'll buy the next Clapton album, whatever it is. It's not out of loyalty but out of love for the whole body of the music we've gotten from these great musicians, writers, and singers.

[Cogs]

That's the thing about taste. Everyone's is different. I like the Clapton because of the quality of his voice and the way he expresses the profound sadness of the song. The Stern version is, for me, a totally different thing. They are playing the changes and making some nice music but I don't think they get at the depth of the song. It's about DEATH!

In terms of jazz versions, my fave is still the one with Miles Davis and Cannonball Adderly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsz6TE6t7-A

Clapton's version is good because it's about the lyric & the melody. Stern's version is good because it's about the melody & the chord structure. Just goes to show a good song is a good song even if it is 70 yrs old. Mike keeps it fresh by introducing modern harmonies, imo.

[S. Cane]

I think Clapton's voice has gotten better with age. He has become a great singer over the years. I like his version of Autumn Leaves. I "like" all of his stuff but haven't been over the top about anything he's put out since Reptile.

Jagger's too

[Offshore Angler]

I think when a lot of the people judging the older acts today are looking at 70 trips around the sun themselves they may change their opinion. I, for one, appreciate the older acts getting out and playing live for and audience. You have to remember that a lot of them are at the age where just being onstage for 90 minutes isn't easy, but they give it their best.

And like something I read on the interwebs: "We all need to start thinking about what type of world we're going to leave behind for Keith Richards."

Agreed with Pete, the Rolling Stones still set the bar for live performance. Truly a band that dug what Dylan Thomas was saying!

[S. Cane]

[S. Cane]

His youth formula:










My idol.

[ch willie]

Agreed with Pete, the Rolling Stones still set the bar for live performance. Truly a band that dug what Dylan Thomas was saying!

They've definitely fought against the dying of the light. I remember when the press asked whether Mick could still rock at 40. I saw them in 81, when he was 40, and there was no doubt that they were as energetic as they'd ever been. And Tattoo You is one of my favorite albums from that era.

I do love it that The Stones have remained mostly intact. I do miss Bill Wyman as the bassist. They're another group whose new albums I will always get. I thought the Bigger Bang was a very good but not great album. There are some high points. I can't help but wonder how the songs would sound if Wyman and Charlie Watts were locked in.

[Rickenjangle]

His youth formula:










My idol.

I wish I could have my own bottle of Jack onstage with me. Instead I got to pay some bartender $7 for a Beam on the rocks. Bugger all, I should have joined the Stones when they called and asked me. :)

[FrankJohnson]

although I don't completely agree with your opinion on limited remaining members still performing as "the Act" I understand it. I also understand the level of "artistic Performance" of earlier works - and have to agree a LOT on most of that/them.

That said, I saw a late .38 special show, a Skynnyrd show, and foreigner too - and dug it.

I don't make too many shows anymore, because money has been tight and so has my schedule. That said - I have seen a LOT of newer blues acts who used to play with some of the older days heavy hitters - Sean Chambers of Hubert Sumlins band, Albert Castiglia of Little Walters group, Brent Jonhson of Bryan Lee, etc.....
and although these guys are not trying to ride those shirttails, or claim that they are the "new Them" you can see some of the performance personalities in them. I am grateful for that. I think I digress on a very different vein than that which you were expanding on, and apologize - not trying to hijack the thread.

I think you make a really good point using the example of wings (Wings over america was an epic album) and Sir Paul. He as a person, a performer, and a musician - one of a kind!

Albums Like Foghat Live, Thin Lizzy Live and Dangerous, Frampton comes a live, wings over america, Skynnyrd one more from the road etc. All HUGE - lifetime event type shows, which seem to have been lost on todays crowds.

I believe that Phish is doing a lot of super live shows which capture some of that vibe - who else ?

[pc]

I think I'll go w/the Bob Berg/Mike Stern version of that tune:

Love this. Do you have Stern's "Standards and Other Songs"? Probably about 20 years old now but great takes on some of the standards. A trio I play with occasionally stole his version of "Nardis" from that album for our live shows. So cool.

[Doc W]

Clapton's version is good because it's about the lyric & the melody. Stern's version is good because it's about the melody & the chord structure. Just goes to show a good song is a good song even if it is 70 yrs old. Mike keeps it fresh by introducing modern harmonies, imo.

Exactly! This may be one of the most standard "standards." It lends itself well to so many versions. And speaking of longevity, Bach uses the same sequence of chords as in the verse (more or less) to modulate from the tonic to the relative minor in the second Brandenburg Concerto. Listen to this starting at about 1:30. I bet those changes are all over the place in classical and baroque music.

!

[Doc W]

I wish I could have my own bottle of Jack onstage with me. Instead I got to pay some bartender $7 for a Beam on the rocks. Bugger all, I should have joined the Stones when they called and asked me. :)

RJ, were you drinking a lot of Jack D at the time the Stones called you?

[Rickenjangle]

RJ, were you drinking a lot of Jack D at the time the Stones called you?

I think it was a combination of that and some righteous Spleef, mon!

Hey Doc - both my kids are at Carleton U. starting this year! Jake's in year 2 and Emma's an entering Freshman.

[S. Cane]

Jack Daniels is one if my best bandmates...

[ch willie]

Born and raised in Tennessee. Can't stand the smell or taste of Jack Daniels. Son bought me a fifth of the single barrel stuff, and I secretly gave it away. I told him a year later, before he had time to go shopping for a birthday gift.

I drank a lot of Jack when I was a teenager, barfed it on two occasions--which probably explains my squeamishness.

[Rickenjangle]

I'm actually not a big JD fan either - though it's good in coke, I like my bourbon on the rocks, and to me, Jack ain't no sippin' whiskey.

My go-to at home is (believe it or not) Evan Williams, which comes in a bottle that looks just like Jack, tastes better, and is about 35% less expensive. And at most places, I'll order a Beam, but that's getting ridiculously expensive for the meh taste it has.