Excellent track. i've always liked the Stones, though I can't for the life of me understand why people want to go and see the wrinklies.
9/10
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EeGyQIgvSV0
Printable View
Excellent track. i've always liked the Stones, though I can't for the life of me understand why people want to go and see the wrinklies.
9/10
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EeGyQIgvSV0
I've never understood this idea that rock musicians should give up performing when they hit - what? - forty-seven? No one expects it of blues musicians or jazz musicians or classical musicians.
The argument is often that it's the music of rebellious youth, and so should be performed only by young people. But jazz was once the music of rebellious youth. The blues was once the music of American blacks. And most classical music was revolutionary when it was new, and most composers were under forty when they did their best work.
I saw the Stones about fifteen years ago. They were great. I've seen them on film since, and Keith still plays guitar in a way that no one can match. Why should he stop doing it?
But if you understand why people wanted to see them at 25, how about 35? 45? 55? At what point do you think it becomes incomprehensible?
If rock musicians can still play their music good, I don't see what age matters at all. I saw Yes a few years ago, and they were awesome. I hope they can still play as good when they're eighty, because I'll go.
Not bad, not bad at all. Cream is one of those bands I always suspected I would like, but just never took the time to check them out. I enjoyed that a lot, though. 8/10.
This may be my favorite classical song ever, and definitely in my all-time top 10. It's just amazing. Adagio in G minor, by Tomaso Albinoni & Remo Giazotto.
I can see you've been waiting for the opportunity to have a chat about this. The premise of rockmusic doesn't seem to fit the older male. If it was all about the music, then I could go with it probably, but rock in particular is mixed up with the young, rebel, outsider, going my own way, sexy attitudes. It's about drug taking fast living which becomes increasingly implausible or, in some rockers cases, just sad.
They're not writing about middle aged anxt, but writing music what concerns the younger male. When I listen to a bit of blues, I don't picture young guys chasing women but older guys having their problems with them. It seems a bit more relevant to the age group. Jazz and classical - well I don't know much about that, but the age doesn't seem to come into it. It doesn't seem to jar.
I suppose I feel the same about Duran Duran, and the other poppy groups whose popularity was built on image plus the music. Perhaps I'm just unimaginative - or is it that I can imagine too much...
Well, if I have, it's been a long wait. I remember thinking about this when I went to see Paul McCartney in the mid-seventies. Even then people were saying they should kick it in the head when they passed thirty. I couldn't see why that made any sense , and I still can't really.
The Beatles and the Stones are the same age as my dad - so it's not anything to do with my identification with them directly. And their audience even now - especially in the US - consists not only of people their own age but also of people my son's age. The subject matter of rock music may largely be youthfulness, but the stuff produced in the Sixties is simply part of the established canon that defines the form.
To my son, and many (not all) of his friends, it would be as silly for a younger person interested in popular music to dismiss the Beatles as it would be for a young person interested in theatre to dismiss Stoppard or Beckett. And, of course, if the Stones play, those young people would be eager to go, and even to go with their parents.
9/10 for that Mutatis, and thanks!
The Stones' appeal becomes more about nostalgia after a while - actually so does most pop/rock/jazz/ etc, but in the Stones' case their longevity is because they were/are interesting and fun in a completely harmless way. They seem like a band who could have packed it in in the early seventies, but were always so deep in debt and living beyond their means they didn't actually start to turn a profit until the eighties, making them even more determined to capitalise on the name - thus the elongated touring schedules and overblown stage shows of the nineties.
I'm never sure if I like their music over the idea of them, but then I'll hear a number I hadn't heard in ages, and the nostalgia kicks in
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mj6_I...eature=related
God, that takes me back. We all grooved to that one at my grandfather's funeral. 10/10
Whatever happened to...
I've always had a soft spot for Portishead. 7/10.
Another of my favorites.
Well yes. Perhaps I'm being ageist in the musical sense.
The only really relevant concern, rather than personal taste, that I've come across is the persistence of older artists against younger acts. I suppose that's understandable given the safety element of the investment. On the other hand the advent of the internet does offer opportunities that didn't exist for young acts in the past. Perhaps there'll be a new musical revolution driven by technology. It has been a long time coming.
It's so evocative of the ending of the film - I can almost see the helicopter lifting off at the end. Besides that, it's a great piece.
10/10
There were some good soul songs in Platoon when they invited Chris into their bunker and he had his first joint.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCwkZrj2VT4
9/10 A great song.
The old lady has been singing this one the past few days, now it's stuck in my head. Be warned this is edgy and raw with a catchy refrain...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vhFn...eature=related
A bonafide classic Gilliatt - 8/10
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1r19H...eature=related