ChatterBank2 mins ago
Oh Gawd...
Seriously? Why?
http://www.dailymail....eals-band-studio.html
Isn't it time they stopped trying to live up to their admittedly awesome past and just retire gracefully?
http://www.dailymail....eals-band-studio.html
Isn't it time they stopped trying to live up to their admittedly awesome past and just retire gracefully?
Answers
No. Why should they?
13:54 Tue 10th Apr 2012
No. Why should they?
Elton John, Phil Collins and Paul McCartney are all in their 60s and still performing. Both Tom Jones and Cliff Richard are over 70 and Leonard Cohen did a 2-year worldwide sell-out tour at the age of 74 three years ago, and has just announced another one. Bob Dylan and Neil Diamond have both had #1 albums here in the past couple of years at over 70.
Tony Bennett's just released an album of duets at 85 which sold really well and plays more than 100 concerts a year.
Are you seriously suggesting an age limit for musicians?
Elton John, Phil Collins and Paul McCartney are all in their 60s and still performing. Both Tom Jones and Cliff Richard are over 70 and Leonard Cohen did a 2-year worldwide sell-out tour at the age of 74 three years ago, and has just announced another one. Bob Dylan and Neil Diamond have both had #1 albums here in the past couple of years at over 70.
Tony Bennett's just released an album of duets at 85 which sold really well and plays more than 100 concerts a year.
Are you seriously suggesting an age limit for musicians?
Forgive me for name-dropping but Mike Rutherford told me recently that he gets really annoyed when people ask him why he still records and tours, even though he is a multi-millionaire. As he pointed out - if you make music until you are rich and then stop, it was obviously just to make money that you made music in the first place, and no genuine musician does that.
So musicians carry on - because it's what they do. What else would a rock and roll band do except record and tour? It's their life-blood and they are still able to do it, so why on earh not/ the Stones always cite the old bluesmen who always carried on until they dropped, admittedly most of them still needed to earn a living, but if music is in your blood, that's what you do.
Intriguingly, the young hipsters of pop's earliest days are now the Stones' ages, we have never had 'old' pop stars until now, but as as has been pointed out, if they can, and they want to, they should. There is no cut-off at which point any musician is going to say - my best work is behind me now, so I'll toddle off to the allotment.
Long may they all continue!
So musicians carry on - because it's what they do. What else would a rock and roll band do except record and tour? It's their life-blood and they are still able to do it, so why on earh not/ the Stones always cite the old bluesmen who always carried on until they dropped, admittedly most of them still needed to earn a living, but if music is in your blood, that's what you do.
Intriguingly, the young hipsters of pop's earliest days are now the Stones' ages, we have never had 'old' pop stars until now, but as as has been pointed out, if they can, and they want to, they should. There is no cut-off at which point any musician is going to say - my best work is behind me now, so I'll toddle off to the allotment.
Long may they all continue!
Awww, im pretty much once again in the minority then, well, apart from tony a RR.
I just look at them now, wrinkly rockers and personally believe they're embarrassing. I mean specifically the Stones have they done anything decent/good/chart worthy in the last 20/30 years?
Not many agree with me that seeing 60+ year olds singing 'bout rock n roll is frankly daft?
Now if they sang songs about their shopping trollies, cups of tea and their arthritic limbs- i'd buy 'em!
I just look at them now, wrinkly rockers and personally believe they're embarrassing. I mean specifically the Stones have they done anything decent/good/chart worthy in the last 20/30 years?
Not many agree with me that seeing 60+ year olds singing 'bout rock n roll is frankly daft?
Now if they sang songs about their shopping trollies, cups of tea and their arthritic limbs- i'd buy 'em!
Why is it daft?
As I said, we have never had 'old' rock and roll stars until now.
The Stones don't pretend to be anything they are not - they sing their old hits as they should, because millions pay to see them do so, and we can all re-live our pasts together.
I am 57, and if anyone hinted that I was too old to get excited about music and gigs, I would be seriously upset.
My parents' generation, the WWII and after generation may well be moving out of the way now, but my generation who are coming in to replace them are very very different indeed, and doing the 'acceptable' things that go with being older are simply not on the agenda - and that includes my lifetime heroes suddenly moving onto sheltered accomodation and playing whist all day!!!
As I said, we have never had 'old' rock and roll stars until now.
The Stones don't pretend to be anything they are not - they sing their old hits as they should, because millions pay to see them do so, and we can all re-live our pasts together.
I am 57, and if anyone hinted that I was too old to get excited about music and gigs, I would be seriously upset.
My parents' generation, the WWII and after generation may well be moving out of the way now, but my generation who are coming in to replace them are very very different indeed, and doing the 'acceptable' things that go with being older are simply not on the agenda - and that includes my lifetime heroes suddenly moving onto sheltered accomodation and playing whist all day!!!
Andy makes my point far more eloquently than I.
The Stones're only talking about going into a studio for a bit. If what they record is deemed good enough, it'll be put on sale. If it sells, then they've justified what they've done.
The last time I saw them, not too many years ago, much of the audience was 20-odd years old. If nobody buys the music or concert tickets, then they should stop. Until then, more power to them, I say.
One wouldn't make these points about classical musicians, why have double standards about this?
These guys are genuine musicians, it's what they do. Can't comment about Boyzone and Westlife 'cos I don't know if they're musicians.
The Stones're only talking about going into a studio for a bit. If what they record is deemed good enough, it'll be put on sale. If it sells, then they've justified what they've done.
The last time I saw them, not too many years ago, much of the audience was 20-odd years old. If nobody buys the music or concert tickets, then they should stop. Until then, more power to them, I say.
One wouldn't make these points about classical musicians, why have double standards about this?
These guys are genuine musicians, it's what they do. Can't comment about Boyzone and Westlife 'cos I don't know if they're musicians.
Latest Posts
ChatterBank8 mins ago
News22 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles24 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles30 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles31 mins ago
