Retirement ages for rockers ???

#1
Having had the misfortune to see former hellraisers Ossie Osbourne and Alice Cooper appear on shows like Paul O'grady and some other pish morning effort, status quo on des and mel, the stones are back on tour - whats left of the who are threatening to go back out - queen have dragged up a hasbeen from the 70's, cream reformed for the albert hall earlier this year - the list goes on about a bunch of geriatric farts prostituting what was an undeniably brillian back catalogue of wonderful music that has brought a lot of people a lot of enjoyment but shouldnt there be a compulsory retirement age for rock stars to prevent them making complete cnuts of themselves - and if there should be an age - what should it be - I reckon 45's a good start.
 
#2
AHEM, Sir Lemmy is 60 this year and try saying a bad word about him. Ozzy may be a laughing stock on parkinson but i can garauntee when he walks on stage he aint the bumbling fool you see cleaning up dog sh!t on MTV. Black Sabbath headlined at donnington this year and out performed every band on the main stage all weekend. (motorhead were better but they were on the 2nd stage). Paul Rodgers is certainly not a has been from the 70's and from what i've heard seems to be doing a very fine job with Queen. As for Status Quo they still sell records and their singles are usually sat well in the top 20 with very little airplay or publicity required. Their most recent album contained a fair few tracks that would not have been out of place on piledriver.

The reason these old bands are still around is because nothing that is produced today can match it. These guys should retire when somebody else does it beter than them and at the moment there is noboy better than them
 
#3
Thanks Thebull140 for an opinion - firstly I have to agree with your point that the main reason the old bands are still around is because there is nothing better out there - quite true, but with regard to the rest of what you say
Firstly Queen and Paul Rodgers - I saw Paul when he was (arguably) at his best at the Isle of Wight when fronting Free and to be honest he was good, but not great and certainly not exceptional - and in no way a replacement for freddie Mercury - Queen was Freddie, without him they would have been, at best, an above average rock band but with a limited shelf life. For May and aylor to carry on prostituting themselves as Queen is not right - still at least they avoided calling themselves we free queens.
As for Ossie - I confess to not having seen him in many a year but from what ive seen from the Osbournes when they show clips from Ozzfest then, yes he cans still cut it, but why drag out the orignal line up from the sabs - Its a shame that more of the younger musicians didnt pick up on the osbornes and realsie what rock was all about - a chance missed perhaps for something decent to start - which brings me neatly onto Sir Lemmy of Kilminster - another one that has decided to grow old gracefully judging by the documentary - agreed hei s Motorhead and even without Clarke and Taylor there was little - if any - difference in the sound, but to allow a show to be opened by a bunch of 13 yr old kids from a posh school tutored by Gene Simmonds - well its not exactly rock'n'roll is it - even though Charterhouse gave us Genesis (wether theyll be forgiven for that or not is still out with the jury) and Cambridge gave us the Floyd - i dont recall any wonder groups from Christ's Hospital. As for the Quo well, Abe Lincoln (i think) said you can fool some of the people all the time and all of the people some of the time but not all of the people all of the time - well the quo have done it - well certainly with the rock world. Their latest offering -The party aint over - sounds exactly like the last dozen or so offerings - they are still in search of the fourth chord
I think from the recent outputs of Rod Stewart - touring again with a show based around american musical toons and Ossie realising an album of covers, which includes a john lennon one (who was never mr heavy metal) is signs that even the old stagers of rock are finding it difficult - when u look thru t he papers and see that the Moody Blues, Eagles and Santana are still currentl on tour (along with some real crpa like Sailor, Duran Duran, Bay City Rollers (wtf) and a ha - its becoming a sad place for music and, agreeing with you, I havent heard anything recently that will change my mind.
So I guess I'll go back to my memories of when these bands really were great, turn on tune in and drop out
The above, of course, is only my opinion - trouble is that it seems only me and thee have opinions regarding this - perhaps thats another reason the wrinkly rockers go on - having said all that at leat u seem like you care - the sort of man i could sit in a pub with and put the rock world to rights.
 
B

Biscuits_AB

Guest
#4
I reckon that even at their grand old ages, that most of them still knock out better tunes that the sh*te we have forced on us today.

Those out of tune c*nts who sing that Children in Need song. What a load of pish. They're so good I can't even remember what they call themselves. They should have stayed in the Working Mens clubs.

Kieth Richards and the Expensive Winos any day mate. There are some excellent musicians still kicking about who are knocking 60 or thereabouts. The Stones never made a bad track. There are so mnay others as well.

If I could belt out a rift like Eric Clapton, Steve Rothery or Marc Knopfler, I'd be chuffed to f&ck.
 
#5
Have to agree with the p1sh for children in need and im dreading the crimbo number one and yes id like to be able to belt out riffs like clappers and knoplfer but would have to disagree about the stones old chap - in my humble opinion the lastdecent album they did was beggars banquet and thats a long long time ago.
 
#6
Can you seriously imagine telling the Almighty Lemmy (Blessed be his name) that he has to stop doing what he's been doing these past thousnad or so years? I'm not that brave/stupid.
 
#7
originalphantom, thats a good point and well presented - i just wonder if the parents of the Christs Hospital School know who he is - still could have been worse - they could have (literally) opened for gary glitter.
 
#8
Right some good points there and in my fine position as musical facist it's time for me to ignore them completely and return to my rant.

I wanted to hate Queen and Paul Rodgers i really did i listened to the album and even though i'm a huge Queen fan and yes Queen was Freddy there was something there. Paul rodgers does not try to be Freddy he sings in his style and does a good job at being a frontman. It was never going to be easy stepping up there and it's took a long time to happen for somebody to do it. He only sings the songs he knows he can do justice to and at no time did he try to mimic Freddy. Ok the whole tour reaked of tax bill just come in need to make some fast bucks but i dont care because hearing brian mays guitar again made the hair on the back of my neck stand up just like it did the first time i listened to night at the opera. The fact that still during Crazy Little Thing called love the entire crowd sang the ready freddy reply shows that Freddy will never be replaced and during Bohemian Rhapsody all Paul Rodgers sang was the end the rest was Freddy on the big screen.

As for Ozzy and why drag out the rest of the sabs it's simple really. Black Sabbath created Heavy metal not Ozzy, the legend is Black Sabbath 75% of ozzy solo stuff is generally a bit crap. People need to seperate the 2 Black sabbath is 4 guys who play deep dark heavy rock and play it fcuking well. it's not the osbournes and it's not ozzy. Onto Sir Lemmy, do you actualy believe that he had anything to do with that joke rock school. Yes they opened for motorhead but thats the labels responsibility. The kids came on they played 1 song then they left and then the proper support band came on then motorhead. i dont even think lemmy was in the building when they were on. i think i read it in Uncut that Lemmy was offered a reality Tv show but turned it down on the grounds of "who the fcuk would want to watch me sitting about in my underwear drinking JD all day".

Right the now the Quo. It sells records simple as, they have a dedicated fan base (me included) they aren't going to make new fans with ground breaking music but they are going to keep their existing fans happy by playing what they like. You have to remember that the quo are the most popular british band of all time. They might not have had more number ones but they have certainly had more UK hit records than any band in history. Including those 4 over rated scouser. and i'll have you know theior new album has at least 6 chords in it. All of them different.

Ok Rod Stewarts recent outputs are generally a bit dire (my gran likes it though) but Ozzy's covers album is a different story. Earlier this year Ozzy released a greatest hits box set that included 2 CD's of rarities, bootlegs, and covers that were recorded previoulsy. The success of these propmted Ozzy to go back into the studio and rerecord some of them as a proper album with decent production.

yes there is a lot of gash from the 80's going round cashing in at the moment but there are some good classic bands out there. There is also some fine bands out there who have the ability to become great. The problem is the british musical press like hyping a good band up then dropping them and slagging them down even though nothing has changed. For example take the Darkness, 2 years ago every man and his dog loved them then NME turned on them and they're a joke yet from what i've heard the new album is going to be a fine classic british rock album. the It bands at the moment (kaiser Chiefs, My Chemical Romance etc etc) will be treted in the same way not allowing them to push themselves. it happened to Greenday 7 years ago. The music press hated them they slated them as a predictable they released warning and it got dire reviews. It took them 5 years to release another album but after some hard work touring and some electric live shows they released american idiot and everybody loved them again. Now the press love them again and when they write now they always mention warning as a tragically underated album even though it was them who rated it. The bands are there the talent is there but the charts are dogged down with predictable mass produced Cr@p or sh1te hip hop. it's pushed down the throat of the kids who think this is the way it should be so when a decent band come along they are happy to drop them as soon as they're told somebody else is cool.

We need these old bands to kep going to show the kids what can be achieved and that music does have staying power further than the next series of X factor.
 
#9
I took my mrs to an open air concert earlier this year and the headliners were anounced to be running late. The lead singer of the group before stood there and said that they'd been asked to play another 30 minutes to fill, but as they only know their set, all they could do was play some of their set again!

And that's the problem with todays groups. They think they can hit the road without doing the apprenticeship that they used to do in the 'old' days. In days of yore, if a group was asked to fill, they'd play a few old Hollies, Beatles or even old rock n roll numbers that they bashed out before they even thought of being a 'group'. Now, if it's not in their set, they can't do it.

Needless to say we just stood around in silence for 30 minutes :?
 

maninblack

LE
Book Reviewer
#10
The Stranglers drummer, Jet Black was born in August 1938, that makes him 67 and still going strong. The baby of the lineup, JJ Burnel was born in February 1952 so he is only 53 and still actviely competitive as a black belt in martial arts competitions.
 
#11
true Rockers DO NOT retire ....

they die of heart failiure induced by cocaine whilst servicing their favourite hookers (note plural)...

(RIP John Entwhistle)

They choke on their own vomint, due to excessive drink/drug intake

(RIP Phil Lynott, and Jimi Hendrix)

They simply do too much of every f ucking chemical to hand ...

(Gawd bless ya Keith Moon)

They are found in a swimming pool, with enough barbies in them to tranq a fully grown Rhino

(RIP Brian Jones)

I could go on .......

They DO NOT hang around telling us how great life was in their day, ..... because they are dead legends...

the rest ... f ucking lightweights. :D
 
#12
shortfuse said:
true Rockers DO NOT retire ....

they die of heart failiure induced by cocaine whilst servicing their favourite hookers (note plural)...

(RIP John Entwhistle)

They choke on their own vomint, due to excessive drink/drug intake

(RIP Phil Lynott, and Jimi Hendrix)

They simply do too much of every f ucking chemical to hand ...

(Gawd bless ya Keith Moon)

They are found in a swimming pool, with enough barbies in them to tranq a fully grown Rhino

(RIP Brian Jones)

I could go on .......

They DO NOT hang around telling us how great life was in their day, ..... because they are dead legends...

the rest ... f ucking lightweights. :D
You forgot the greatest Rock Death of all time. Crashing your plane after losing control after buzzing the tour bus. (Randy Rhodes)
 
#13
Shortfuse - you forgot a few other icons;- Janis Joplin, Jim Morrison, the members of lyrnd skynrd, joe strummer, frank zappa - theres one hell of a great rock band playing ath te pearly gates - shame ill never get to see or hear them as im going straight to hell for some of the t hings ive said on here - unless of course st. peter has a sense of humour.
 
#14
Retirement age for rockers? Absolutely, unequivocably not. My only caveat is so long as they can still do it and don't become embarrassing, carry on rocking.

As for the new generation not holding a candle to the older stuff, broadly I agree. So many want instant celebrity status without having first put in the work, but there are a few honourable exceptions. Okay they're not strictly rockers but I like the Kaiser Chiefs, Delays, Powderfinger, Grinspoon and a few others. Just please don't mention The Darkness unless it's in the same sentence as the phrase 'a musical joke'.
 
#15
actually i only mention darkness in connection with words like tossers, musical ineptitude, gary glitter lookalikes and cnuts - reminds me i must enter them on the complete cnuts thread - unless someone has beaten me to it.
 
#16
Once again, the old cnuts pull their catheters out, totter to their feet and start shouting at the nurse about the state of modern music. What really gets me is the fact that the irony is completely lost on you. You've become your own dads and grandads. "call thaaat muuusiiiic? (Abe Simpson Voice) Weee uuuseed to beee rooockk aaand rollll toooo y'know!"

Before I launch my reply proper, I'd like to state my belief that the 'old' music to which most of you refer was raw, beautiful and vitally important art. I will never try to play down that fact. But while most of you maintain that the musical revolution birthed in Dave Gilmour's riffs, Robert Plant's shivering vocal chords and Johnny Rotten's upright middle finger was dead in its cot by the time you started growing a pot belly and back hair, I maintain that you are just being lazy and trite.

In much the same way as Burchill and Parsons decided to declare punk 'dead' (probably because they got turned away from CBGB's cos it was full of those younger and prettier) 3 years after its conception, I think your elitism has more to do with trying to immortalize your youth than any real understanding of music's impact on society. After all, it's you fuckers that formed the record labels and A&R vampires that makes the mainstream so vapid and malignant. Thanks for that by the way, it makes for some thankfully awesome, chav-free gigs in some seedy little venues around the nation (you know, the kind you don't go in cos they're too smokey and don't serve Bishop's Crotch).

My main response to those who think any piece of music not uttered by a 60 year old multi millionaire is a peice of crap is this: what the feck happened to you? Look up your likes of Cream on everyhit.com - you'll find they weren't the all pervasive mainstream influences you remember. Look up the Floyd, when Wish You Were Here came out, Rod Stwewart was No 1 with We Are Sailing. Fuck yourselves if you think that's great music. When Led Zep III came out, you were all secretly bobbing away to Freda Payne in order to get a fumble off Jenny McCallister from next door. Don't even get me started on 80's mainstream - a procession of inebriated paedophiles, sexually ambiguous hair spray addicts and Bossa Nova for fecks sake.

The modern charts are targeted at 10-15 year old girls, in much the same way as nonces try to buy the best sweets and the cutest puppies. To sit back in your stanna bath-mate and slagg it off is unnecessary and missing the point, to judge all modern music by the what little girls listen to nowadays is lazy.

To finally answer the original question, they should retire from singing songs of rebellion, class war and balls-out rock and roll when they start rehearsing them in manshions in LA, drive to the gigs in a helicopter and sing them to people who've paid a fortune to cling to the past, but can't be arrsed to support real, new, vital British music.

Wish You Were Here is pretty much my favourite song, along with Romeo and Juliet and I Wanna be Sedated, I just happen to also like the Dogs, the Towers of London and The Duels.

Who?
 
#17
Aaaaaah, the irony - do you know that this time last year Ozzy was peddling a hash of 'Changes' with his fat chav daughter and whenever they want to apply some comedy value to Never Mind The Buzzc0cks they wheel out Lemmy? - Rock'n'Roll my arrse, they're living on reputations.

I have to be quick to mention that my era is of yesteryear and most of the bands mentioned here (except for Quo - I've got some pride!), but, I try to keep up to date. I don't dislike modern music because it' s modern - I don't like it because it's not very good.

Don't get me wrong there is still a lot of new stuff that is good you just have to hunt for it - the good stuff isn't as high profile as the pretty boy/girl mincing about stuff that seems to be everywhere. Has anyone heard the new Kate Bush album? - her majesty is 47 (I think) and sounding as good as she did all those years ago and I can't think of a new female singer who comes close - please don't suggest the wee Georgian girl or the one from Devon - they just pander to old farts with no clue.

My daughter (aged 7) was playing McFly yesterday and when I told her I heard it playing she was so apologetic. I told her to make her own mind up about music - she doesn't need to like Pink Floyd because her old man does - but I reminded her if she played McFly in my house then it is my perogative to make fun of her :lol:

Your 'angelic rock and roll supergroup' are no better than George Best - they too couldn't handle the fame and in quite a few cases because they died young(ish) had their reputations as muso's promoted beyond what they actually were. (have you listened to Jim Morrison's voice - 50 a day habit if ever I heard it and pretty tuneless too - Keith Moon was quite a good drummer at the style he played but there were numerous better who didn't get the credit because they're still alive - and Janis Joplin - if you like C&W sang by a 75 year old bloke - fine).

Agreed on Queen (not my favourite band - too quirky for my liking) - they were on their way out until Live Aid and Freddy stole the show. Without Freddy they are not Queen - at least the Bass player had the dignity to accept this. I like Paul Rodgers - both Free and Bad Company were good bands in their day, but his singing style surely does not lend itself to Queen music - sounds like a cabaret show to me. Anyone signed them up for the Mess Xmas do?
 

maninblack

LE
Book Reviewer
#18
RTFQ said:
Once again, the old cnuts pull their catheters out, totter to their feet and start shouting at the nurse about the state of modern music. blah blah blah.........blah blah blah.......Wish You Were Here is pretty much my favourite song, along with Romeo and Juliet and I Wanna be Sedated, I just happen to also like the Dogs, the Towers of London and The Duels.

Who?
Do you know what else, RTFQ, you sound just like I did having a pop at my Dad about music when I was your age. :twisted:
 
#19
The main problem with the lack of orignality and greatness of modern music is that the genneration in question havent got any heroes to emulate - when i was a lad - the aspiring musicians wanted to be clapton/beck/page/hendrix/bruce/baker/jagger/richards/jones etc etc etc the list goes on - who have they got to aspire to today - apart from possibly the edge or johnny marr as guitarits - bass players escape me, vocalists pass me by and drummers - not a hope. sorry but between 64 and 74 music moved so far. so fast that the new generation werent left with a lot to look for - punk was a welcome revival for its short life - mark knopfler, paul weller and joe strummer revived the guitarits briefly as did topper headon for the drummers - having recently heard mcfly sterilise the pinball wizard - when that came out my youngest lad 15 (who is an aspiring drummer without a hero) said dad - have you got the orignal please - cant get the damne thing back - in fact the band he plays in are in a school concert soon - albeit playing only two tunes - what are they - pinball wizard and clash's i fought the law - i rest my case m'lud - modern rock is going no where very fast.
 
#20
RTFQ said:
To finally answer the original question, they should retire from singing songs of rebellion, class war and balls-out rock and roll when they start rehearsing them in manshions in LA, drive to the gigs in a helicopter and sing them to people who've paid a fortune to cling to the past, but can't be arrsed to support real, new, vital British music.
That's what I meant by so long as they aren't embarrassing. U2 anyone?

RTFQ makes a good point. Music evolves, and if it didn't we'd be well and truly fcuked. I grew up worshipping at the altar of Cream, Led Zep etc. precisely because it spoke to me in ways that the hit parade (no, don't laugh, that's what we called it) didn't. I remember their LPs with great fondness and still play them, but that doesn't mean my tastes have to be forever frozen in the era when we carried an LP under one arm and developed a gait that caused our long hair to rhythmically sway forward and back. :oops:

There is good music about, but in the main you won't find it in the singles charts. Hardly ever did if truth be kown. Neither do you have to be a latter-day John Peel (who played a lot of self-indulgent drivel along with the 'finds'). Just keep an open mind. Reject the shiite by all means, but because it's shiite - not because it's new.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top