Jump to content

A bunch of old farts got back together last year...


Recommended Posts

well, certainly aside from Zeppelin, and maybe The Police, and possibly The Eagles, they all either sucked, were in it only for the money, or both... The Eagles make me wonder, given that they let Wal-Mart steal that album, though it was quite good... sorry boys and girls, you only make yourselves look worse trying to pull off reunions you can't handle...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah but their re-union had nothing to do with their popularity and sales being sky high. :D

No, as a matter of fact it didn't. They could have done that years ago. It had everything to do with Ahmet Ertegun's recent death and their desire to honor him appropriately.

Link to post
Share on other sites
well, certainly aside from Zeppelin, and maybe The Police, and possibly The Eagles, they all either sucked, were in it only for the money, or both... The Eagles make me wonder, given that they let Wal-Mart steal that album, though it was quite good... sorry boys and girls, you only make yourselves look worse trying to pull off reunions you can't handle...

eagles made an exclusive deal with walmart for their latest album..while they are great together...their motives are suspect to say the least....there was a recent 60 minute interview with the members of the eagles and it was apparent that don henley (at least on his part) and glen frey can barely tolerate each other...there is still a chip on henley's shoulder...glen and don were sitting in a booth (don inside) don acted like he wanted to jump out and storm out

Link to post
Share on other sites

The way the writer discusses Zeppelin is so direspectful - first they are at the top of a list of bands under the heading of "A bunch of old farts..."; second just flippantly using the phrase "their dead drummer's son" is so low-class I can't even know where to begin (maybe make a mention that they were respectful of their friend to have his son play drums?; and thirdly, as someone posted above, Zeppelin did it for charity. I'm a huge Zep fan by my own standards but not even close to some of the people on this Board who live & breathe Zeppelin, but even I was offended by this disgusting piece of work. K

Link to post
Share on other sites

cant anybody just enjoy a tour or an album by an older band, this music is ther college and there life are thy supposed to go get a job at mc donalds so some loser critic wont write shit about them last i checked we all have brains and can figure it out for ourselves :huh:

Link to post
Share on other sites
More old farts back together THIS year. Def Leppard, with Whitesnake as support band! Any thoughts?

my take is that i think people who tired of so call performers who can't sing and use fake it to a record on stage...classic rock is the "in" thing now...if you look at the top performing acts in the us for 2007...most of them were "old farts"

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah but their re-union had nothing to do with their popularity and sales being sky high. :D

Ulimately cash is a factor in almost everything that happens in the music scene. Just as in the 70's though I'd say the Zep reunion was a happy marriage of that and good music/intensions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
my take is that i think people who tired of so call performers who can't sing and use fake it to a record on stage...classic rock is the "in" thing now...if you look at the top performing acts in the us for 2007...most of them were "old farts"

Yes and much rather watch em than young spotty or should that be scrotty teen bands...eeek there just isn't anything original coming out from kids in rock/pop music at the mo !!

Edited by leddy
Link to post
Share on other sites
Frankly I am tired of young 20 or 30-something year olds writing columns that "old farts" should just keel over and die already.

I am also tired of the opinion that old rockers are not entitled to keep making money? Says who?

I don't think that they're saying old rockers aren't entitled to make more money, it's "gee whiz, the only way you could bring in the major cash was to tour under your old name?" half these bands aren't even the originals. don't even think for a moment that a band like say, Lynyrd Skynyrd would bring in the same number of sales and fans if it was the same people touring under a name with no reference to Skynyrd. The ONLY reason many of these old farts can make as much as they do on a tour is because of the name they choose to tour under.

Link to post
Share on other sites
ITS NOT FOR THE MONEY.

why then, do you suppose Gilmour decided to ditch his solo career in favor of calling his solo band Pink Floyd? Sting's solo career pretty much blew chunks, why then, did he decide perhaps The Police was a more worth while pastime? The Doors. every time you blink that band is struggling to keep going, they fight tooth and nail to keep their name as a reference to The Doors, even though it's not even close to being The Doors. The Who. can you think of any other reason why a band that is made up of two people from The Who would choose to call itself The Who? Two Old Farts And A Backing Band, doesn't exactly pull in ticket sales. Queen. there's a reason why those boys kept going as Queen, and didn't try new things. they make damn well sure that QUEEN is prominent on everything they do. Creedance Clearwater Revisited. here's another that has to keep that link to what they were. Genesis. after Phil Collins quit, they pressed on. it wasn't even close to being the same band, let alone the original, yet they insisted it be called Genesis. Supertramp. the guy who wrote their original material isn't even in the band anymore, yet there they are... the list goes on and on... The Allman Brothers... they may be good, but they insist on calling themselves what they aren't, because they know more people will come to see the tatters of an old band than the makings of a new one.

if these bands were playing more for the music than the money, then they wouldn't give a shit what their name was, they'd be willing to part with the past and move on.

Edited by Zephyrus
Link to post
Share on other sites
why then, do you suppose Gilmour decided to ditch his solo career in favor of calling his solo band Pink Floyd?

When did David Gilmour call his solo band Pink Floyd? The last two Pink Floyd tours featured Gilmour, Mason, & Wright. I might bring on the wrath of fans who insist that Pink Floyd doesn't exist without Roger Waters, but I think having 3/4 of the line-up is reasonable for using the name.

Link to post
Share on other sites
When did David Gilmour call his solo band Pink Floyd? The last two Pink Floyd tours featured Gilmour, Mason, & Wright. I might bring on the wrath of fans who insist that Pink Floyd doesn't exist without Roger Waters, but I think having 3/4 of the line-up is reasonable for using the name.

the band was supposed to be finished after The Final Cut, after Roger called it quits and said the band was through. (although it was never Floyd after The Wall) the first album and tour was actually only 1/2 Floyd, Wright was just a session musician, along with a nice handful of other miscellaneous musicians... for the second tour he was a full member. the problem I have is that Gilmour knew his solo career was going nowhere and decided that the only way for him to keep raking in the dough was to tour under the banner of Pink Floyd. the same thing happened to The Band several times, a bunch of the original members figured out they weren't making waves by themselves, so resorted to touring as The Band again, even though they'd called it quits in 1976 and Robbie Robertson refused to participate. they kept doing it after Richard Manuel died, and put out some more albums... the problem I have is these remnants of bands whose members have such obviously crappy solo careers slowly lingering back to tour under their old name with a band that isn't even the original. to say that the lure of more money coming in under one band name isn't a major factor in their decision to resurrect dead bands is ludicrous, and goes a great deal towards making me lose respect for those people.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Genesis. after Phil Collins quit, they pressed on. it wasn't even close to being the same band, let alone the original, yet they insisted it be called Genesis."

Genesis. after Peter Gabriel quit, they pressed on. it wasn't even close to being the same band, let alone the original, yet they insisted it be called Genesis...

Even though they couldn't find a singer!!!

Or a proper drummer come to that!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...