Random. No more or less

Lola said:
Can you imagine??? Wtf!!!

url=https://postimg.cc/WdrX3dsw]
IMG-6414.jpg
[/url]
Click to expand...
Looks painful. ;-)
 
Lola said:
I have been reading real books and watching a lot of comedy to help lighten the load. And yes @Moondog Wily I rocked the night away last night. Thank you always for the encouragement!
Long story short this comedian Bill Engvall is hysterical. Not one swear word. Laughter is really a great medicine.
Click to expand...
I have never seen his stuff, I will check it out! Glad I could encourage!! Rock on!!!
 
aphantomvaper said:
Oh no, it was not meant as I was offended at all, Lola. Thanks for posting it, generally I think its a fun idea and interesting. I apologize for my comment.

We all know you never mean harm or offense.
Click to expand...
Just covering all my tracks.
I know some ppl will get ugly butt hurt from stuff such as this. I forget sometimes.

YouTube with their millions of rules, I like Rumble. You can say exactly what you want without big brother monitoring every word.
 
The Stones start a new tour with on stop in Canada and it ain’t Toronto like before. Mick is 80 years old. Who is this tour for? Fans, them ??? Who’s going to be the drummer? Steve Jordan will drum for them. Never heard of him. But he’s obviously good enough for them.
 
Last edited:
That brings up a good topic for discussion: when does a band really stop being THE BAND?

At this point the Stones only have 3 original members (Wood has been there plenty long enough to be considered original IMO). I guess as long as Mick can sing, they can tour... but when is it not really the Stones anymore?

Black Crowes: it's just the 2 brothers now. To me, that's NOT the Black Crowes. Yes, it was always their band to an extent, because they wrote the songs... but something just rubs me the wrong way about replacing EVERYONE. They are one of my favorites, but I'm not interested in seeing 2 brothers who hate each other half the time play with a bunch of hired guns.

Van Halen? I loved Van Hagar, but when they got rid of Michael Anthony... the whole thing just started to stink. Yes, it's Eddie and Alex's name, but that was A BAND, from the beginning- all the albums with DLR would not have been the success they were without him.

Sambora leaving Bon Jovi. To ME (I'm a big fan), Bon Jovi stopped being Bon Jovi that day, the guy co-wrote most of the songs and ALL the hits with Jon. Jon and Richie were like Mick and Keith. They kept touring of course, and making records, and people keep buying tickets even tho Jon can no longer sing... But I guess that puts any sort of reunion out the window.

Motley Crue... their new song with Jon 5 is God-awful. Of course Neil can't sing anymore anyway.

Journey... only 2 original members (Schon and Cain, who are suing each other LOL), with a Steve Perry sound-alike? Journey is another fave, but I won't see them live without Perry. It's not JOURNEY to me.

Foreigner.... they sound AWESOME, Kelly Hansen has been a fantastic vocalist all these years... but Mick Jones is the only original member, and he doesn't even play all the live shows... at what point are they a COVER band? (or a tribute band?)

This list could go on & on... just wondering when YOU would consider an band not "THE band" anymore? For better or worse?
 
Last edited:
ruger9 said:
That brings up a good topic for discussion: when does a band really stop being THE BAND?

At this point the Stones only have 3 original members (Wood has been there plenty long enough to be considered original IMO). I guess as long as Mick can sing, they can tour... but when is it not really the Stones anymore?

Black Crowes: it's just the 2 brothers now. To me, that's NOT the Black Crowes. Yes, it was always their band to an extent, because they wrote the songs... but something just rubs me the wrong way about replacing EVERYONE. They are one of my favorites, but I'm not interested in seeing 2 brothers who hate each other half the time play with a bunch of hired guns.

Van Halen? I loved Van Hagar, but when they got rid of Michael Anthony... the whole thing just started to stink. Yes, it's Eddie and Alex's name, but that was A BAND, from the beginning- all the albums with DLR would not have been the success they were without him.

Sambora leaving Bon Jovi. To ME (I'm a big fan), Bon Jovi stopped being Bon Jovi that day, the guy co-wrote most of the songs and ALL the hits with Jon. Jon and Richie were like Mick and Keith. They kept touring of course, and making records, and people keep buying tickets even tho Jon can no longer sing... But I guess that puts any sort of reunion out the window.

Motley Crue... their new song with Jon 5 is God-awful. Of course Neil can't sing anymore anyway.

Journey... only 2 original members (Schon and Cain, who are suing each other LOL), with a Steve Perry sound-alike? Journey is another fave, but I won't see them live without Perry. It's not JOURNEY to me.

Foreigner.... they sound AWESOME, Kelly Hansen has been a fantastic vocalist all these years... but Mick Jones is the only original member, and he doesn't even play all the live shows... at what point are they a COVER band? (or a tribute band?)

This list could go on & on... just wondering when YOU would consider an band not "THE band" anymore? For better or worse?
Click to expand...
Excellent points. I find that bands that manage to go on after losing a valued longtime member deserve credit for being devoted to their craft, but there does come a time when the magic isn't right anymore.
I will always adore the Eagles, but without Glenn it's not at all the real deal. Meisner and Leadon were replaced but with guys that made the group better in far more ways. Vince is a fab musician and and a fine singer, but not truly an "Eagle". Deacon deserves (needs?) to discover his own path.
Richie was always the one on the fringe of the spotlight glow. Doing the great stuff with Jon getting the accolades. His name, his band I reckon.
I was always of the mind that Lou Gram was "the guy" in Foreigner as far as the vocal talents went. But that's just a personal thing, I still liked them with Kelly belting out great stuff.
Journey will never again be "Journey" without Steve...sort of like Boston without Brad.
 
Could you imagine the Beatles with a Paul McCartney replacement. It just isn’t the Fab Four anymore!
 
Help please. Are these down or alternate picking or could you do either or at@1:18 and throughout the rest of this song?

 
I think we kind of romanticize bands. They’re supposed to be some group of people who came together in some fateful way to pursue some shared artistic journey with the purest of intentions. That’s what the marketing machines spin out, anyway.

Any commercially huge band is actually a business. Sure, they have a brand and story that might be a bit embellished. When someone decides to leave the company, is fired, or can’t go on, does that mean the business should fold?

Perhaps along those lines, when Paul Smith departs PRS, what then?
 
ruger9 said:
That brings up a good topic for discussion: when does a band really stop being THE BAND?
Click to expand...
Man, that is a tough one. Trying to think of other examples, my opinion kind of depends on the band.

Deep Purple was always Deep Purple to me until Ritchie left. I think it was because DP replaced their original bass player and singer before they became huge, so when they did it again it was still DP to me.

To me Alice Cooper wasn't Alice Cooper after he went solo. Black Sabbath wasn't Black Sabbath after Ozzy left. So there is kind of opposite ends of the same thing.

Maybe it would be fair to say it is situational?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top