Refreshing and great to see some real musicians on here! The Boss, Stones, U2 and The Police amongst the best.
Thought It would be full of modern day rubbish, yet apart from one appearance from One Direction there isn't. No Bieber or any hip hop rubbish. Brilliant!
I don't, I was in the wrong era. Actually, any century would have been better for me haha. I hardly like anything after 1950. Unless it is pure music aswell, like a real artist that is amazing on a guitar. But things like that hardly show up on the radio.
I guess I don't like anything produced, maybe that is it. Just a person and his instrument, making music that is in their soul. then I like it.
I was at a festival yesterday and there was a little swing band/quartet. It sounded great. Then the speakers/amplifier (dont know the right term in english..sorry) went on, apparently they didnt work before, suddenly I didnt like it as much anymore, it sounded so fake. Like it was a recording.
Yes there are some real musicians here, but, and this is definitely an opinion, there are some truly poor musicians in this list as well. The Rolling Stones are all poor musicians (yes, all of them!). AC/DC makes some catchy tunes, but every song has basically the same drum beat and the same chord progressions. They (AC/DC) can play better than the Rolling Stones, but their music is rudimentary at best. Ask any cover band and they will tell you that AC/DC music can be learned in one practice session. Madonna can sort of sing, but she isn't much of a musician. One Direction is just a bunch of pretty boys who are told what to sing. Now, there are some that are great musicians that have made some great original music like Sting (The Police), the Eagles, U2, etc.
Sorry if I've offended any fans here, but this is my opinion.
The Eagles are terrible. They have great chops as session musicians, but their music is about as lame as rock music can get. Nobody cares whether Keith Richards is a "poor musician." He's a creative guitar player who has written licks that people will enjoy long after he's gone (if he is in fact mortal). You can find 1,000 guys in every city who can bust out a technically challenging guitar solo. It's a much more common skill than being able to *write* great music. Your approach to music seems very misguided.
That is where I personally gets stuck in art, all forms (guitar, drawing, writing etc), I can reproduce quite difficult stuff, but when I have to start from scratch there is this big black hole I am staring in, too much possibilities and somehow the urge to not to want to be too simple (while that often produce great things) and I am completely blocked. Because the possibilities are too endless.
At least you didn't put Garth Brooks at the bottom - I know you aren't a fan. His was the only one I recognized by name. I got many others just by guessing. I was hoping George Strait's "Cowboy Rides Away" tour would be on here - it broke lots of records at the time, (in 2014, I think.)
yeah maybe I overstated that. and I am actually a fan of his work with the Beatles. Just don't think he's done anything worth listening to since then, and some of it was downright awful. Like that "Freedom" song that came out right after 9/11.
Not a fan of Garth Brooks, either, but I have actually liked a couple things he has done, too.
Before the internet ruined our lives; the real hardcore fans of bands would queue for tickets when their favourite bands would tour. I remember queueing for Pink Floyd tickets on their Momentary Lapse of Reason tour, sitting in the Queen St Mall for 10 hours waiting for the ticket office to open. Sadly it doesn't happen any more. The show was awesome, and nobody sucked on a sherbet before or during the show, because you don't need drugs to have a good time. At least, that's what the talking rabbit told me.
That was true even in the early 2000s. I remember waiting in line for Green Day tickets overnight. Everyone was so excited, and then around midnight someone drove up with huge speakers mounted on the outside of his car, blasting their (then) new album. People went crazy. It was such a fun and uniting experience.
First of all the guys in the Stones are definitely good musicians. As are the members of U2 and the Police; in my opinion Stewart Copeland is the best drummer of all time. Now, as to why these great acts are on this list multiple times also has to do with the incredibly high cost of tickets, which is insane now. And yes, I too remember waiting in line overnight for u2, the who, springsteen and others.
How on Earth do people who haven't sold a new song to anyone in 30, 40 years get to the top of the concert heap? Who wants to watch 70 and 80 year olds with long hair and goofy costumes do the same songs through a terrible P.A. for hundreds of dollars?
I go see live bands about ten times a month, and I have to agree with you. It's insane that people will pay $300 to sit a half-mile away from the ghost of Mick Jagger while he does a third-rate rendition of Brown Sugar. If you live in or near a city (which you probably do, if you're going to see one of these bands), you can find great live music for $10, no matter what you're looking for. Jazz, punk, originals, covers, whatever. You can drink cheaper beer and stand ten feet from the band, which will probably be working harder and taking the music more seriously than bands like the Stones do at this point. I've also grown very fond of tribute bands. They really go all-out. I saw a tribute of The Cure last week. They played all the big hits, nailed them, I stood three feet away, and it cost $10. To see the real thing would have cost $200 and I would have been up in the nosebleeds. You have to look at the jumbotron to see the band. It's just not worth the hassle.
100% agree with this. The Ramones cover band I saw once was way more fun than the actual Ramones concert I went to (in the mid-90s, so they weren't even that ancient then).
That's my feeling about ALL concerts, however, if I'm forced to see a concert I would rather see one performed by one of the bands that is 30+ years old and has stood the test of time because of their music over someone lip syncing or being breathy while singing because they are trying to entertain with overly produced displays instead of letting their music be the entertainment.
Yeah. It's hilarious. I don't care about most of the musicians of any genre or era, but everyone in the list does have undeniable talent. I personally can't stand people like Ed Sheeran, Michael Jackson, Freddie Mercury and Elton John, but they are immensely gifted. Just because something about their final product annoys me doesn't mean I'm incapable of understanding that others do see their talent in a different light than I.
How can the same tour be going on for four years (ie. Metallica)? I guess technically if it is supporting the same album, but kinda lame. I guess when the band is in their 60s, they need to go home for months at a time before heading back out.
Billy Joel's tour is an interesting one. He isn't really on tour in the sense people think of it. He plays Madison Square Garden in New York, his home city, once a month (and, remarkably, continues to sell it out after five years), then he flies to one other city every two weeks or so. He'll fly to Tulsa, play a gig, then go home for two weeks. Then he'll fly to Chicago, play a gig, and then go back home for two weeks. This has been going on five years.
would have saved them the trouble of remembering which city they were playing in when they addressed the crowd and said they were the best audience ever.
Echoing an earlier comment from someone else, it is strange that the last name of the artist on The Wall Live tour doesn't work versus putting in his full name or the name of his former band, given that the last names of other solo artists are accepted.
what i’ll say about swift is that i didn’t think much of her until i listened to her deep cuts like All too well and the Folklore album. Now she’s one of my favourite modern songwriters.
Whether you like Swift or not, it's remarkable she tops the list, beating older acts who charge ridiculous amounts of money for a ticket. I'll echo other comments -- support your local indie artists, pay the $10-25 for a far better music experience.
Thought It would be full of modern day rubbish, yet apart from one appearance from One Direction there isn't. No Bieber or any hip hop rubbish. Brilliant!
I guess I don't like anything produced, maybe that is it. Just a person and his instrument, making music that is in their soul. then I like it.
I was at a festival yesterday and there was a little swing band/quartet. It sounded great. Then the speakers/amplifier (dont know the right term in english..sorry) went on, apparently they didnt work before, suddenly I didnt like it as much anymore, it sounded so fake. Like it was a recording.
Sorry if I've offended any fans here, but this is my opinion.
That is where I personally gets stuck in art, all forms (guitar, drawing, writing etc), I can reproduce quite difficult stuff, but when I have to start from scratch there is this big black hole I am staring in, too much possibilities and somehow the urge to not to want to be too simple (while that often produce great things) and I am completely blocked. Because the possibilities are too endless.
Not a fan of Garth Brooks, either, but I have actually liked a couple things he has done, too.
Anyway just my opinion so nobody actually cares.
First thing I thought of for 360 was Anderson Cooper.