|
Post by swingseat on Oct 30, 2019 19:04:53 GMT
I think one part of my detachment with all things Quo is also down to simply having a different general taste in music to many on here. I certainly like rock music, at least some of what comes across (to me) as melodic - but generally listen to a wide variety of other genres. There is no right or wrong of course when it comes to taste, but maybe a reason why I still don't compare Backbone to anything released by the original group in the 1970's. There is the obvious Quo theme still there, but essentially to me they are (and have been for some time even while Rick was around) quite separate musical entities and so get judged, so to speak, on their own merits rather than compared to the 'classic era' Ironically though for perceiving them as a different entity, it makes it more puzzling that Live they continue to play so many hits repetitively in the same order from so long back, when they have released so much other material much more representative of the 'different entity' over so many years afterwards and which they could include instead. Its a pity that they don't appear to have enough confidence in more of it - to include more of it.Yep, the big problem why I got turned off from the live gigs in the end. And it's a shame because there are enough songs from the "Different entity" as you call it that would actually be very nice to hear live. But I guess that will never happen sadly enough. You really think that your different musical taste compared to others is a cause for your detachment ? Just wondering cos if I look at my own musical taste it is and has been all over the musical spectrum for a long time already, yet, strange enough their latest effort really has pleased me. Its a good question I think there are some who make the comparisons because of expectations that the music and image of the band should emulate as close as possible the grit image of the 70's. Then, Quo were compared with a lot of heavy rock bands - when to me, they sounded much more country and blues orientated than many of those perceived contempories. I think they started achieving a cross over appeal from the late 70's onwards at a time when they were losing the support of the earliest fans, because in truth in my opinion they had always had those influences which were not the same as the comparisons that earliest fans made of them. The divergence happened with the albums vs the live act - the latter of which carried over the heavier image whilst the former was simply more and more revealing the lighter and more diverse influences which in truth were never that far away beneath the surface. So its easy to see why the earliest fans became more dispppointed than those who became followers of the group a bit later. i was one of those who became a follower later and maybe that also played a part in better acceptance of the apparent changes.
|
|
|
Post by Victor on Oct 30, 2019 19:08:18 GMT
Yep, the big problem why I got turned off from the live gigs in the end. And it's a shame because there are enough songs from the "Different entity" as you call it that would actually be very nice to hear live. But I guess that will never happen sadly enough. You really think that your different musical taste compared to others is a cause for your detachment ? Just wondering cos if I look at my own musical taste it is and has been all over the musical spectrum for a long time already, yet, strange enough their latest effort really has pleased me. Its a good question I think there are some who make the comparisons because of expectations that the music and image of the band should emulate as close as possible the grit image of the 70's. Then, Quo were compared with a lot of heavy rock bands - when to me, they sounded much more country and blues orientated than many of those perceived contempories. I think they started achieving a cross over appeal from the late 70's onwards at a time when they were losing the support of the earliest fans, because in truth in my opinion they had always had those influences which were not the same as the comparisons that earliest fans made of them. The divergence happened with the albums vs the live act - the latter of which carried over the heavier image whilst the former was simply more and more revealing the lighter and more diverse influences which in truth were never that far away beneath the surface. So its easy to see why the earliest fans became more dispppointed than those who became followers of the group a bit later. i was one of those who became a follower later and maybe that also played a part in better acceptance of the apparent changes. Yea lot of truth in your message. I do think though it also has something to do with how open minded one is towards music in general, those with a more open mind accept changes easier too I suppose
|
|
|
Post by swingseat on Oct 30, 2019 19:08:58 GMT
I think one part of my detachment with all things Quo is also down to simply having a different general taste in music to many on here. I certainly like rock music, at least some of what comes across (to me) as melodic - but generally listen to a wide variety of other genres. There is no right or wrong of course when it comes to taste, but maybe a reason why I still don't compare Backbone to anything released by the original group in the 1970's. There is the obvious Quo theme still there, but essentially to me they are (and have been for some time even while Rick was around) quite separate musical entities and so get judged, so to speak, on their own merits rather than compared to the 'classic era' Ironically though for perceiving them as a different entity, it makes it more puzzling that Live they continue to play so many hits repetitively in the same order from so long back, when they have released so much other material much more representative of the 'different entity' over so many years afterwards and which they could include instead. Its a pity that they don't appear to have enough confidence in more of it - to include more of it. Most of the people who go to Quo gigs these days (imo) aren't there to hear the new songs or album tracks, they are there for the classic singles....that's why they mainly play them imo. I don't think it's about the confidence of playing them. Francis or Rhino will play them at their solo gigs. Yes, there is truth in that. Though I have still wondered if they felt uncomfortable playing more of them than they do. There have been excuses about the song selection 'not flowing' when the solo gigs, as you mention, have seen quite a selection 'flow' without any problem at all. So that is why it seems there is more to it than that.
|
|
|
Post by Victor on Oct 30, 2019 19:17:49 GMT
Swingseat,
Yea the time of stepping in and when one got to know Quo probably has something to do with it as well. In my case I stepped in around the time of RAOTW...I bought the back catologue back then within weeks and enjoyed the older albums even more...however, I never was dissapointed with the albums WYW, JS and NTL as some of the older fans were, very much to the contrary
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2019 19:19:49 GMT
I think one part of my detachment with all things Quo is also down to simply having a different general taste in music to many on here. I certainly like rock music, at least some of what comes across (to me) as melodic - but generally listen to a wide variety of other genres. There is no right or wrong of course when it comes to taste, but maybe a reason why I still don't compare Backbone to anything released by the original group in the 1970's. There is the obvious Quo theme still there, but essentially to me they are (and have been for some time even while Rick was around) quite separate musical entities and so get judged, so to speak, on their own merits rather than compared to the 'classic era' Ironically though for perceiving them as a different entity, it makes it more puzzling that Live they continue to play so many hits repetitively in the same order from so long back, when they have released so much other material much more representative of the 'different entity' over so many years afterwards and which they could include instead. Its a pity that they don't appear to have enough confidence in more of it - to include more of it. Most of the people who go to Quo gigs these days (imo) aren't there to hear the new songs or album tracks, they are there for the classic singles....that's why they mainly play them imo. I don't think it's about the confidence of playing them. Francis or Rhino will play them at their solo gigs. Absolutely spot on. Touring makes money, releasing new material makes relatively little in comparison now, so you play what people want to hear at gigs, not what you think they should listen to.
|
|
|
Post by Victor on Oct 30, 2019 19:54:37 GMT
Most of the people who go to Quo gigs these days (imo) aren't there to hear the new songs or album tracks, they are there for the classic singles....that's why they mainly play them imo. I don't think it's about the confidence of playing them. Francis or Rhino will play them at their solo gigs. Absolutely spot on. Touring makes money, releasing new material makes relatively little in comparison now, so you play what people want to hear at gigs, not what you think they should listen to. In a way it's actually quite something to be able to keep that up. I think i would get incredibly bored if I would have to do that myself, play the same songs at every concert over and over again
|
|
|
Post by swingseat on Oct 31, 2019 9:51:58 GMT
Most of the people who go to Quo gigs these days (imo) aren't there to hear the new songs or album tracks, they are there for the classic singles....that's why they mainly play them imo. I don't think it's about the confidence of playing them. Francis or Rhino will play them at their solo gigs. Absolutely spot on. Touring makes money, releasing new material makes relatively little in comparison now, so you play what people want to hear at gigs, not what you think they should listen to. That might be the reality, but its still possible to have a different view about song selection. From my own point of view, its not too important because I don't closely follow Quo these days. But because I have some knowledge of their history (and still like them) it means I can nevertheless also look at what might, in time, make a difference as to whether I would revisit them at least one more time to enjoy hearing something different. A change in song selection, however unlikely it might be, is what might make that difference.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2019 11:18:27 GMT
Absolutely spot on. Touring makes money, releasing new material makes relatively little in comparison now, so you play what people want to hear at gigs, not what you think they should listen to. That might be the reality, but its still possible to have a different view about song selection. From my own point of view, its not too important because I don't closely follow Quo these days. But because I have some knowledge of their history (and still like them) it means I can nevertheless also look at what might, in time, make a difference as to whether I would revisit them at least one more time to enjoy hearing something different. A change in song selection, however unlikely it might be, is what might make that difference. I would love there to be a radical shake up in the set list, certainly now they have Richie as a vocalist they could easily go for a much heavier, classic boogie sound that I'm sure would bring back some old fans. Sadly it would drive away the casuals who go for RAOTW and WYW and the big radio hits including the dreaded ITAN. Unfortunately large scale touring, which despite the opinions of certain doom mongers on here, is what Quo still do, is only financially viable if you can draw in the broadest of audiences so i suspect next year's tour will see some tweeks to bring in songs from Backbone as it has been such a commercial and fan base success but the basic cornerstones of the setlist will all still be there. There are ways round this but the amount of extra rehearsal time required is something Francis wasn't willing to do even in the 1970s, he certainly wouldn't now.
|
|
|
Post by swingseat on Oct 31, 2019 12:17:31 GMT
It wouldn't necessarily have to be a totally heavy sound, there are enough who like a range of songs with light and shade across the spectrum. I don't eschew the idea that there is either 70's old guard on the one hand and casual hit adorers on the other. Enough, such as myself exist who have appreciated a blend - and where no tribal binary categorical box types of people exist.
Another reason really why I have become detached from any 'fanbase' because these things can become too polarized. There is nothing wrong with having specific preferences one way or the other, but things are not necessarily just black or white.
|
|
|
Post by MrWaistcoat on Oct 31, 2019 12:26:45 GMT
I think the setlist is so lazy. Nobody would mind 4/5 immovable hits, but there's so many hits they don't play. If every tour they removed 3 songs and added 3, plus something "for the hardcore" everyone would be happy. If they threw in something like Umleitung some fans would go just for that.
Yes this tour will get backbone songs, but the whole thing feels so familiar it's not enough to tempt me back. It can't and won't be better without Rick with much the same set. They need to give it a real makeover. Barely anyone thinks they will. Perhaps Francis could consider that a set that flows less well could still end up being enjoyed more?
|
|
|
Post by Victor on Oct 31, 2019 12:38:49 GMT
It wouldn't necessarily have to be a totally heavy sound, there are enough who like a range of songs with light and shade across the spectrum. I don't eschew the idea that there is either 70's old guard on the one hand and casual hit adorers on the other. Enough, such as myself exist who have appreciated a blend - and where no tribal binary categorical box types of people exist. Another reason really why I have become detached from any 'fanbase' because these things can become too polarized. There is nothing wrong with having specific preferences one way or the other, but things are not necessarily just black or white.Exactly !!!
|
|
|
Post by Victor on Oct 31, 2019 12:41:20 GMT
I think the setlist is so lazy. Nobody would mind 4/5 immovable hits, but there's so many hits they don't play. If every tour they removed 3 songs and added 3, plus something "for the hardcore" everyone would be happy. If they threw in something like Umleitung some fans would go just for that.
Yes this tour will get backbone songs, but the whole thing feels so familiar it's not enough to tempt me back. It can't and won't be better without Rick with much the same set. They need to give it a real makeover. Barely anyone thinks they will. Perhaps Francis could consider that a set that flows less well could still end up being enjoyed more? If they play Umleitung ?? OH YEA !!! I would be perfectly fine with a set list combining early and later songs in a new set list and they dn't nessecarely need to be hits for me at all ! Face the music, Umleitung and Take me away in one set ? You BET i would give it a try again !
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2019 12:51:18 GMT
It wouldn't necessarily have to be a totally heavy sound, there are enough who like a range of songs with light and shade across the spectrum. I don't eschew the idea that there is either 70's old guard on the one hand and casual hit adorers on the other. Enough, such as myself exist who have appreciated a blend - and where no tribal binary categorical box types of people exist. Another reason really why I have become detached from any 'fanbase' because these things can become too polarized. There is nothing wrong with having specific preferences one way or the other, but things are not necessarily just black or white. I agree about a range of songs but it all boils down to Francis. A highly talented musician but also fundamentally a very lazy one. Set rotation or having a number of full sets to use depending on the target audience takes a lot of rehearsal and he's never been willing to give his time to that.
|
|
|
Post by Mrs Flittersnoop on Oct 31, 2019 15:21:05 GMT
We both love the album and we both had zero expectations of it. Perhaps that helps explain our positive reaction? I enjoy modern AC/DC albums. Its like putting on an old pair of slippers, instantly into it. An enjoyable experience for a month, then you don't go back. As with Quo, you get (ex) hardcore fans who think it's a disgrace putting out an album in the DC name that isn't remotely as good as everything upto and including Back in Black. With both bands (also Maiden and some other "heritage" bands I like) I'm always pleased they've made the new album, £10 for intensive listening for 3-6 weeks isn't a bad return. Can't help but wonder whether the old Quo fans who diss modern Quo would similarly diss modern AC/DC - I expect so. None of us are wrong. Don't know whether Backbone will get listened to by me 5 or 10 years from now. But for the enjoyment I've had from it already, it's been value for money and I'm very pleased they've knocked it out. Yea, lot of truth in what you are saying above. Makes me think of how happy I was with Maiden's Brave new world and Priest's latest effort !
Huzzah! And I reckon Maiden are better now than they were before, but that is probably because they now play even more of what I like to hear from them. They've also stayed very lively live, and with great guitar playing. I can't think of any other "heritage band" I take an interest in that does that.
With Quo, for a few golden years, once they'd got past trying to sound like other bands, they sounded like themselves and less like a version of everyone else. That's when they were good. It was sad hearing them flop back into good quality middle of the road pop rock. If they had ditched their old stuff to play all new material, their audience would have evaporated down to club level pretty quickly, as has happened with lots of older bands.
|
|
|
Post by unspokenwords on Oct 31, 2019 19:50:32 GMT
It wouldn't necessarily have to be a totally heavy sound, there are enough who like a range of songs with light and shade across the spectrum. I don't eschew the idea that there is either 70's old guard on the one hand and casual hit adorers on the other. Enough, such as myself exist who have appreciated a blend - and where no tribal binary categorical box types of people exist. Another reason really why I have become detached from any 'fanbase' because these things can become too polarized. There is nothing wrong with having specific preferences one way or the other, but things are not necessarily just black or white. I think there is a misconception, often stated by Rossi, that Frantic Four fans are some sort of death metal, hard rock fans only, holding up their hands in a sign of horns etc., This fails to recognise that people like myself came to Quo because they had melody, light and shade, rock and country all cooked within a 12 bar blues based music that does have a special heaviness, but not metal rock by any stretch of the imagination. Whilst I certainly place myself on the pre 1977 side of Quo this is because of what i perceived to be a drop in quality/change of what happened in 1977 and thereafter, and also with the post Quo band that continues today. In the past 30+ years there have only a few songs that I thought were ok. Not so with the Frantic Four. In the Frantic Four period I also really, really liked the softer side such as Fine Fine Fine, And Its Better Now, Lonely Man, Unspoken Words, A Year, All The Reasons (all those 3 of one 'heavy period album!!!) Where I am, Claudie, Blue For You, etc., Personally if you viewed my record collection, and look at what I listen to, there is a broad, eclectic taste that would defy the view of all the old Quo heads having their heads stuck in the sand. This includes for myself interest in all sorts of folk music, some country, punk, classic and opera! Of course classic period Quo is still a big part. If the band reformed after the split had have a different quality I may have followed it but for myself it didn't, it became bland and mediocre relying almost totally on playing the Frantic Four music to survive. This is not to say that those that like it are wrong or have a poor taste. It is just different tastes. It was however a new and different band.
|
|