• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Bands that need to retire…

Status
Not open for further replies.
#41
GK Growl said:
+1. Funny you mention it. I JUST retired. I just held a press conference announcing it.
Click to expand...

Did anybody show up? ;)

I've thought for a while some of the older guys should give it up.

I was impressed with the ones who modified their songs to match their current singing abilities instead of trying to scream it out like they did in their heyday.

Once a musician, always a musician but I think the music should evolve as the person does instead of milking the same thing for 40 years.

my2c
 
#43
I, recently, saw Steppenwolf open for Lynyrd Skynyrd and I was not sure what to expect. The band members with John Kay have been with him for a long time and it sure did show as they were extremely tight. I was very surprised and pleased at the performance they did. While John Kay, at the age of 69, does not sound vocally like he did years ago, they were really good.
 
#49
mellowinman said:
I think all of you posting in this thread need to retire.
Click to expand...
Nope, I need the money. I really hope most of the artists mentioned here don't.

Besides, I'm probably better than ever at my job. Thankfully, it doesn't involve anything physically strenuous like singing or playing an instrument.;)
 
#51
The Rolling Stones. Obviously. It's just getting embarrassing to watch and they aren't contributing anything new to music anymore.

Totally agree with U2. You can only put out so many albums that are full of songs constructed around the natural reverb of a stadium. And most of them don't even make it into the stadium.

I think Pearl Jam still have some live tours in them, but there last few albums have been totally and utterly underwhelming. It's been a very long time since their music has had that 'spark'.

But I'm on the fence. If people are still listening and still coming to shows, and it's making the fans and the musicians happy, then so be it. Pearl Jam releasing a POS every few years is rally nothing for me to get worked-up about (but I wish people didn't care so much when the Rolling Stones go on tour.)

Additionally, I don't think twice about Herbie Hancock still playing live, or Ornette Coleman releasing new albums, or anyone like that, but maybe that's because those guys keep moving forward and haven't rested on their laurels.
 
#53
I'd like to retire some day, but I hope I can play music until I die.
If people want to pay to see me do it, who am I to say no.

Most of those mentioned wouldn't get me to go see them any more.
But, both young and old fans have the desire to see them or they couldn't afford to tour...
 
#54
RHCP definitely. They should've given up before the end of the '90s.

To give a bit of balance though: I saw Ben Folds Five last year and they were excellent live, and the album they put out in 2012 is really good. There are some 'Ben Folds solo' tunes on there but lots of great Five sound too. Really surprised me.
 
#55
MHensleyJr said:
Paul McCartney and Sting.

Both had their time. It passed long ago. Time to hang up your basses, boys...
Click to expand...

And do what?


McCartney has certainly lost a lot of his voice (due to the fact that he always sings in the original key of the song. If he would go down a half step or two it would make a big difference), but his playing is still very spot on, and the band is very tight.

Sting? Really? And U2? They're not even in 'dinosauric' category yet!!

I think you've got athletes and musicians all mixed up . . . .
 
#57
HeavyJazz77 said:
Speaking of Motley Crue…

I get it’s a living, but didn’t you save any of your cash before Napster turned the music industry on its ear? What other bands need to stop milking their brand?

Kiss?
Queen?
Pearl Jam?
Click to expand...

from the few "big stars" ive gotten to know, most of them will admit they are just trying to work for a living.

i'm not talking about paul mccartney, but people you'd think should be financially in good shape to not work anymore.
 
#58
jandscotten said:
Cheap Trick.
Saw them on the Guitar Center Presents series the other day...the only and overwhelming emotion I felt was just sad. They were out of tune, out rhythm, out of breath and made no sense at all during most of the interview. The bassist had to keep correcting the guitar player's memory....where are the "loved ones" who can say enough is enough?
Click to expand...

I think they've been going through some sort of hellacious lawsuit with Bun E Carlos, too.
 
#59
As long as the fans keep showing up why retire? getting a chance to see some living legends is still pretty incredible in this digital age and to be honest I don't see many groups who they can pass the torch to anyway.
 
#60
McCartney still puts on a great show and is always making new music, as is Neil Young. The WHO's last albulm for me was 'Who Are You?' If they had stopped at that pont when Moon died, they'd be legends today. Any band that is still running around on their material from 10-20-30 years ago should call it a day. Any ARTIST still writing their own material should continue until they want to stop. Somebody made a comment on how bad the latest BOWIE release was. I have only heard 2 tracks, and I have to say they were Brilliant. Loved it. Skynrd died with their last Ronnie and crew release-Street ? its been a downward slide ever since for them. For me, any band that got famous AS A BAND and is missing any one or two ORIGINAL members is done.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back