|
Post by kachunk on Aug 12, 2017 14:58:47 GMT
Maybe on that '79 tour,some of the 2nd/3rd night dates at certain venues didn't sell out. I would assume that having heard the RAOTW and IYCSTH albums,some fans actually voted with their feet and didn't bother in the way that they normally would. As the '81 tour included 3 sold out nights at Wembley Arena,4 at Hammersmith and 4 at the N.E.C,maybe those fans had responded positively to the subsequent albums after IYCSTH. The band have said that they received thousands of letters from disgruntled fans regarding those two albums and perhaps some fans did not bother with the '79 tour. I hope that's true because if nothing else,it proves that the original line up wasn't beyond criticism from it's own fans and it would show that whilst the Quo army was loyal,it wasn't blindly loyal. Stalinist rewriting of history from people who like Quo purely as entertainers/celebrities as opposed to being a credible rock band.
|
|
|
Post by dennis on Aug 12, 2017 15:53:49 GMT
Disrespecting the classic line-up, both without & with the addition of Andy, does nothing to enhance the status of the 80's & beyond line-ups. What it does is to reveal an overly defensive posture on the part of some fans of recent line-ups, presumably borne of an underlying awareness that the output during the '70's towers over the subsequent releases & performances. I don't really understand why they're bothered, they're free to like whatever they like but why they think their choice is validated in some way by pretending that the band that built the legacy that subsequent line-ups live off is somehow inferior just seems a peculiarly warped logic.
|
|
|
Post by MrWaistcoat on Aug 12, 2017 16:26:40 GMT
I don't think the divisions of the fanbase are that surprising
Quo have inspired masses of passionate support; that passion will always result in passionate debate where there is controversy.
I remember looking on a Metallica MB when the St Anger album came out. Lars had gone for an experimental tribal drum sound. The vicousness of the fan arguments were quite extreme
Compared to the Quo story, that wasn't a very controversial event. If Kirk or lars were replaced , the fanbase would go into meltdown. Polite discussion would be rare!
Quo have done lots of highly controversial things. Passionate debate from a passionate bunch is to be expected
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2017 17:37:18 GMT
Maybe on that '79 tour,some of the 2nd/3rd night dates at certain venues didn't sell out. I would assume that having heard the RAOTW and IYCSTH albums,some fans actually voted with their feet and didn't bother in the way that they normally would. As the '81 tour included 3 sold out nights at Wembley Arena,4 at Hammersmith and 4 at the N.E.C,maybe those fans had responded positively to the subsequent albums after IYCSTH. The band have said that they received thousands of letters from disgruntled fans regarding those two albums and perhaps some fans did not bother with the '79 tour. I hope that's true because if nothing else,it proves that the original line up wasn't beyond criticism from it's own fans and it would show that whilst the Quo army was loyal,it wasn't blindly loyal. Stalinist rewriting of history from people who like Quo purely as entertainers/celebrities as opposed to being a credible rock band. This is interesting because I just don't remember lack of the demand for the gigs. I'm not saying it didn't happen, but every single one seemed to be only barnstorming to me. Maybe I have been to the moon and back...
The only thing you mention I do have some small recall on is an interview with Rick before a Wembley gig where he was asked about the RAOTW album and why they chose to get Pip W involved. Rick commented on the critical letters they had received about the sound going too soft but that he didn't mind because the gigs were still received well - and that at the time he thought RAOTW (the song) was one of the best ideas they had had. When I heard that interview I still didn't blink!
So clearly there was a problem for fans, and its obviously not 100% revisionism because of all that has happened over the years since. Still amazed it all managed to pass me by though. Quo could truly do wrong back then in my eyes, so clearly I'm guilty at least of putting them beyond criticism at the time. It wasn't blind loyalty, maybe the effects the gig had on me just overrode all else. It was like a party that seemed had no end Just_Cuz_13
|
|
|
Post by MrWaistcoat on Aug 12, 2017 18:15:46 GMT
Must admit to having been blindly loyal for a long long time!
It was PR that woke me up to the fact that "product" was not exactly drop drawer...
I'd thought Army was brilliantly done / polished, just not what I wanted. I'd thought AC was probably brilliant , just not what I'd wanted. With b sides like Lean Machine kicking around, I thought Quo could effortlessly do boogie rock if only they wanted to.
|
|
|
Post by durango95 on Aug 12, 2017 18:26:19 GMT
A quote from someone who was there....-' about the 1979 tour. Punk and new wave had begun to really bite. I went to 4 nights at Edinburgh Odeon and the first two are still the emptiest Quo gigs I've ever been to. Nowhere near even half full.'
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2017 18:26:37 GMT
Must admit to having been blindly loyal for a long long time! It was PR that woke me up to the fact that "product" was not exactly drop drawer... I'd thought Army was brilliantly done / polished, just not what I wanted. I'd thought AC was probably brilliant , just not what I'd wanted. With b sides like Lean Machine kicking around, I thought Quo could effortlessly do boogie rock if only they wanted to. I think you have already answered in that excellent opening post of yours in your thread about Quo's achievement why so much passed under the bridge for some of us, either without blinking and/or noticing.
At the end of the day, its all that matters really
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2017 18:49:53 GMT
John Peel, a staunch advocate of the punk and new wave movement, carried on crediting Quo beyond the Blue For You album by regularly playing the RAOTW and IYCSTH albums on his shows. That ties in with the respect that punks that I knew/was friends with in day to day life gave to Quo. Irrespective of how their studio sound was changing.
Its just my personal view, based on my own experience, but whatever the issues with the sound on either of those albums, respect towards Quo outside the fanbase carried on increasing in my opinion during and beyond these albums. The main hey-day may have peaked and that can be debated endlessly according to personal opinions, but I think its possible to overstate any decline by Quo from the Blue For You album onwards.
My own view is that the disparity grew noticeably across the board to even fans like me when John left - that is the disparity between the albums and the live gigs. The legacy of the gigs since the 70's was enough to sustain me for a few years beyond 1986 when Francis and Rick re-formed the new look Quo.
Ironically from that time onwards, at least from RTYD anyway, I held primary interest in the albums and not the gigs. The opposite way around to the closing couple of years or so that culminated in the End of the Road when 1982 and BTB were a gulf away from the still really good gigs.
The CQ albums were never the quality of the hey-day, but for me the distance between them and the CQ gigs remained significantly greater than it had ever been under the original band. I felt the absence of both John and Alan as missing links in the live performances immediately seeing the new look band in 86, and the reunions years and years later starkly emphasises how they had been missed. However, it didn't seem so bad with the albums where they could be taken as 'products' in their own right by the post 85 band who all showed they were capable of making decent records in their own right. Even if, as I say, they couldn't match the golden years.
They simply didn't play their own catalogue - which can be taken to reinforce the lack of confidence they must have had in them. That, following the massive differences live flagged up the reunions, proved a main tipping point for me.
|
|
|
Post by kachunk on Aug 12, 2017 19:05:56 GMT
Maybe on that '79 tour,some of the 2nd/3rd night dates at certain venues didn't sell out. I would assume that having heard the RAOTW and IYCSTH albums,some fans actually voted with their feet and didn't bother in the way that they normally would. As the '81 tour included 3 sold out nights at Wembley Arena,4 at Hammersmith and 4 at the N.E.C,maybe those fans had responded positively to the subsequent albums after IYCSTH. The band have said that they received thousands of letters from disgruntled fans regarding those two albums and perhaps some fans did not bother with the '79 tour. I hope that's true because if nothing else,it proves that the original line up wasn't beyond criticism from it's own fans and it would show that whilst the Quo army was loyal,it wasn't blindly loyal. Stalinist rewriting of history from people who like Quo purely as entertainers/celebrities as opposed to being a credible rock band. This is interesting because I just don't remember lack of the demand for the gigs. I'm not saying it didn't happen, but every single one seemed to be only barnstorming to me. Maybe I have been to the moon and back...
The only thing you mention I do have some small recall on is an interview with Rick before a Wembley gig where he was asked about the RAOTW album and why they chose to get Pip W involved. Rick commented on the critical letters they had received about the sound going too soft but that he didn't mind because the gigs were still received well - and that at the time he thought RAOTW (the song) was one of the best ideas they had had. When I heard that interview I still didn't blink!
So clearly there was a problem for fans, and its obviously not 100% revisionism because of all that has happened over the years since. Still amazed it all managed to pass me by though. Quo could truly do wrong back then in my eyes, so clearly I'm guilty at least of putting them beyond criticism at the time. It wasn't blind loyalty, maybe the effects the gig had on me just overrode all else. It was like a party that seemed had no end Just_Cuz_13
I was purely guessing my reason for half empty halls on some dates of the '79 tour,assuming that genuinely was the case. People have every right to like any era of Quo they want to,but comparisons are on dodgy ground when trying to pit something post '85 to the indisputable golden era.This has always been the cause of division amongst the fanbase. I think they were a better band in 2006 compared to 1996 but were they better in 1986 compared to 1976?.I just cannot see that. It is true that the fanbase was disgruntled in '78/'79 and that puts the lie that FF fans think the original line up were Gods and beyond faultless,to bed.This is the Stalinist revisionism 40 years later. Outwardly the party did have no end,but with hindsight,behind the scenes,the party was almost over.
|
|
|
Post by 4th Chord on Aug 12, 2017 19:46:55 GMT
Wait, we have an answer. It's because FF fans don't go to current gigs that makes them so lacklustre. Of course!
"It's only because a large percentage of those are FF or nothing and who stubbornly refuse to entertain CQ that we are left with a stale atmosphere with a large majority seated until the hits part of the set".
It also appears from our Trump loving horny friend, that FF fans had their time, let CQ fans have theirs. Riiiiiiiiiight.
JESUS WEPT.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2017 9:22:53 GMT
Wait, we have an answer. It's because FF fans don't go to current gigs that makes them so lacklustre. Of course! "It's only because a large percentage of those are FF or nothing and who stubbornly refuse to entertain CQ that we are left with a stale atmosphere with a large majority seated until the hits part of the set". It also appears from our Trump loving horny friend, that FF fans had their time, let CQ fans have theirs. Riiiiiiiiiight. JESUS WEPT. So, let me get this straight... It's OUR fault for not giving support to a set that for nearly 20 years has more or less consisted of; Caroline Wanderer / SBYBIL / PP Rain / DWMT / BTR 4500X / HYB / SR BOTE Proposing Medley BFM Oriental CUOY ITAN LOAI / Gerdundula ROLD DD WYW RAOTW ? And despite us continually being told to ignore the promotion as it is apparently aimed at the casuals, it's OUR fault that Quo have chosen not to play songs that Mr and Mrs Smith would know? Are we hardcore supposed to be happy with Quo because they have kept BOTE in the set since it was first played in 2007 and the two HT tracks for the five years beyond that on the basis that they are obscure tracks that only we would know? Maybe if the band toured less the set wouldn't have become so stale, or maybe just maybe they could have spent more time writing songs that were every bit as anthemic and complex as 4500x, HYB, SR etc, and it wouldn't have been the same songs on rotation... Or perhaps we could have heard TWH instead of HYB, GGUAG instead of SR - like for like songs - that wouldn't have disrupted the "flow" of the set? Or after seeing the FF and Francis himself come up with entirely new sets have the fans decided that the concept of flow is a lot of bullshit anyway? I don't see why with this and Quo's constant pandering to people that only know the band for one song that us hardcore fans are to blame and/or we are expected to care.
|
|
|
Post by curiousgirl on Aug 13, 2017 9:51:15 GMT
4th you need to moderate yourself. Don't be drawn down by fools. Or control freaks whomever they are. It is no ones job to say who is or isn't a Quo fan. If it was down to me there would be a few hundred who would pass muster. I’m not often, but if they want to have a direct go at members here then hell mend them. They’re the ones suggesting people on here aren’t Quo fans btw, not the othet way around. They can like whatever the hell they want to but they can piss off with the hypocritical posts about how opinions here don’t matter. I don’t think my comment is anything but factual. Agree. And having now had 'a look', I find it strange that the only way they can say how good Quo are now, is to run down the past and views of members here. Surely they don't need to do that if the music is so good. Or may be this is long distance trolling?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2017 10:53:59 GMT
Francis still manages to speak lucidly in interviews about the original organic approach to their music way back in the day. Rehearsals/jamming providing the brainchild for album song writing, and, being derived from a live approach to song writing, becoming natural choices also to go in the set. The live experience and ad-libbing that goes with it being the inspiration for the studio.
He says all this, fully aware that he has lead a total rejection of this as a means to produce music for Status Quo for decades now. The approach he really favours, and claims he would have preferred even back in the hey day, is to keep making pretty packages of songs that are immaculately produced and polished in the studio, as bit parts recorded at different times and then put together like parts of a car at an assembly plant, but are 100% devoid of any spur on the moment ad lib that is transferred as raw product to allow a spontaneous live element to creep into the music. No doubt, because the concept and creation of so many of these songs has been artificial, it becomes hard to try to bring everyone together as a band to play them in a natural familiar way. Probably what is meant by the songs' needing to flow'.
No surprise that the ingrained in stone set list, OCD stage management and immaculate sound ( devoid of any sudden unexpected deviation to create an element of excitement at what might be coming next) has savaged any resemblance of the modus operandi that made Quo the raw, exciting and no boundaries rock band they once were.
Its obvious that John and Alan, the former at least always free back in the day from any of the drugs that blighted Mr Rossi at what was a pivotal time, still understand and relates to the natural simplicity of the original approach. Yet Francis dismisses them, and the spontaneous successful approach he created with them, as being stuck in the 70's and describes the music itself which made him and his band-mates famous as sh1t.
Because the manufactured approach was put in place back in the 80's and has attracted a quite different audience demographic in the process, he points to them as the proof that Status Quo is alive and kicking all these years later. Yet, because of the way that the CQ product has been incepted and makes live reproduction of the songs harder, he has taken so many of the hey day hits songs instead, initially created the organic hand to mouth way, and incorporated them into the general car assembly plant methodology as means to claim that success. No wonder they sound so wooden and soulless when they used to sound so fresh and vibrant. No wonder the gigs are more cardboard cut-out than refreshingly unpredictable and spontaneous.
Meanwhile the fans who admired the original approach and have sat through decades of manufactured music approach played out as re-constituted gig karaoke should remain sanguine, positive and grateful for everything the band still does for them.....Hail Aquostic and LNOTE letsrock Just_Cuz_13
|
|
|
Post by Mrs Flittersnoop on Aug 13, 2017 13:39:14 GMT
Agree. And having now had 'a look', I find it strange that the only way they can say how good Quo are now, is to run down the past and views of members here. Surely they don't need to do that if the music is so good. Or may be this is long distance trolling? Strange to tell, there have always been people around who pump their own preferences by knocking other peoples'. It's a way of feeling part of a bigger or a more elite crowd (depending on how elite your crowd is, I suppose ;-) ).
|
|
|
Post by Whoppa Choppa on Aug 13, 2017 14:58:53 GMT
Agree. And having now had 'a look', I find it strange that the only way they can say how good Quo are now, is to run down the past and views of members here. Surely they don't need to do that if the music is so good. Or may be this is long distance trolling? Strange to tell, there have always been people around who pump their own preferences by knocking other peoples'. It's a way of feeling part of a bigger or a more elite crowd (depending on how elite your crowd is, I suppose ;-) ). Ahh.. the famous "clique", I believe...
|
|