Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2016 17:46:57 GMT
It's indeed a bit ridiculous that Quo don't play more of their later material and seem to mainly revisit their earlier stuff live. Of course they can't play the old songs the way they used to. They're older, they've changed, they're not the same musicians, the same band if you like, as before. Maybe it's because they try to "give the fans what they want". But, musicwise, this might come across as 'nostalgic', which, of course, is seen as the yearning for some sort of happiness felt in the past. Regarding the set list, it might also be considered completely stale and stagnant. But Quo's past has been an eventful one, made up of events and times that are still important and interesting to this day. History, maybe. Nostalgia, I don't know.
|
|
|
Post by frozenhero on Jan 26, 2016 18:13:44 GMT
Last night I watched a live video from 2014 with Quo3 doing a medley of rarely played songs beginning with Just Supposin, then Railroad, etc. NOT ONE SONG AFTER 1980. Combined with the almost total lack of Quo3 material at shows, it struck me this is just a nostalgia band who occasionally put out a new album of rock and roll. For me, the odd thing is that most of the new rock material is quite good, limited only by an inferior rhythm section. When Rossi says he doesn't want to be a nostalgia band, he's either being disingenuous, or he's in his own world. He already is what he says that he doesn't want to be. I disagree strongly, and I've laid down a lot of that on the old MB, but if you want to hear me say it again, go ahead.
|
|
|
Post by americanquo on Jan 26, 2016 18:25:22 GMT
Last night I watched a live video from 2014 with Quo3 doing a medley of rarely played songs beginning with Just Supposin, then Railroad, etc. NOT ONE SONG AFTER 1980. Combined with the almost total lack of Quo3 material at shows, it struck me this is just a nostalgia band who occasionally put out a new album of rock and roll. For me, the odd thing is that most of the new rock material is quite good, limited only by an inferior rhythm section. When Rossi says he doesn't want to be a nostalgia band, he's either being disingenuous, or he's in his own world. He already is what he says that he doesn't want to be. I disagree strongly, and I've laid down a lot of that on the old MB, but if you want to hear me say it again, go ahead. I've got no axe to grind here. I approached this band with no knowledge whatsoever, and didn't even know there had been a lineup change for the first few weeks. In my eyes, 'Hello' had the same weight as 'Thirsty Work'. It wasn't until I became familiar enough with the music to make my own judgments that I started coming to conclusions. Remember, I LIKE a lot of the later work. I think they should play mostly later work on stage, with a few oldies thrown in. That would be playing your own material, and there's more than enough to fill a great setlist. Yet, they do not do it. Why not? The standard answer is they are giving the fans what they want, and yet, they really aren't. If the fans want to hear the old songs, then the fans would prefer to hear them by the people who wrote, influenced, recorded and produced them. That's giving the people what they want, if the people want the oldies, and according to Quo's current management, they do. They are talking out of both sides of their mouths. Anyway, I love the band and love a lot of the later material.
|
|
|
Post by madtom on Jan 26, 2016 18:52:42 GMT
The standard answer is they are giving the fans what they want, and yet, they really aren't. If the fans want to hear the old songs, then the fans would prefer to hear them by the people who wrote, influenced, recorded and produced them. That's giving the people what they want, if the people want the oldies, and according to Quo's current management, they do. They are talking out of both sides of their mouths. You have summed it up perfectly AQ.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2016 18:58:05 GMT
If you mean STATUS QUO who last played at Dublin then YES it was Nostalgia , nostalgia at its very finest , but if you mean the group that also plays many of the same songs then yes its also nostalgia but done half arsed .
|
|
|
Post by frozenhero on Jan 26, 2016 20:30:22 GMT
I disagree strongly, and I've laid down a lot of that on the old MB, but if you want to hear me say it again, go ahead. I've got no axe to grind here. I approached this band with no knowledge whatsoever, and didn't even know there had been a lineup change for the first few weeks. In my eyes, 'Hello' had the same weight as 'Thirsty Work'. It wasn't until I became familiar enough with the music to make my own judgments that I started coming to conclusions. Remember, I LIKE a lot of the later work. I think they should play mostly later work on stage, with a few oldies thrown in. That would be playing your own material, and there's more than enough to fill a great setlist. Yet, they do not do it. Why not? The standard answer is they are giving the fans what they want, and yet, they really aren't. If the fans want to hear the old songs, then the fans would prefer to hear them by the people who wrote, influenced, recorded and produced them. That's giving the people what they want, if the people want the oldies, and according to Quo's current management, they do. They are talking out of both sides of their mouths. Anyway, I love the band and love a lot of the later material. I can understand your point of view. I would like them to play more recent stuff. It's just that when I listen to the Bula Quo Live World Tour double CD I don't hear a band doing nostalgia, and when I listen to the CDs from the Frantic Four reunion I do hear nostalgia. It's not about the songs themselves, it's about how you play them. When the FF reunited they listened (!!!!!) to the 77 Live album before playing. That's nostalgia. Whereas CQ have adapted the FF songs, at least the ones they've been playing over the years, to their own playing style, hence they are not being nostalgic. It doesn't sound like it used to in the 70s.
|
|
|
Post by Whoppa Choppa on Jan 26, 2016 20:54:44 GMT
So nostalgia is playing the songs like they were recorded,and how they got loved, but to adapt an old song and transform it to the recent style: playing it sloppy and uninspired, is not nostalgia? Then they are not nostalgic, but unaware of, and disrespectful to their own legacy. IMO. Etc. Etc.
|
|
|
Post by colmfoley on Jan 27, 2016 0:21:45 GMT
I've got no axe to grind here. I approached this band with no knowledge whatsoever, and didn't even know there had been a lineup change for the first few weeks. In my eyes, 'Hello' had the same weight as 'Thirsty Work'. It wasn't until I became familiar enough with the music to make my own judgments that I started coming to conclusions. Remember, I LIKE a lot of the later work. I think they should play mostly later work on stage, with a few oldies thrown in. That would be playing your own material, and there's more than enough to fill a great setlist. Yet, they do not do it. Why not? The standard answer is they are giving the fans what they want, and yet, they really aren't. If the fans want to hear the old songs, then the fans would prefer to hear them by the people who wrote, influenced, recorded and produced them. That's giving the people what they want, if the people want the oldies, and according to Quo's current management, they do. They are talking out of both sides of their mouths. Anyway, I love the band and love a lot of the later material. I can understand your point of view. I would like them to play more recent stuff. It's just that when I listen to the Bula Quo Live World Tour double CD I don't hear a band doing nostalgia, and when I listen to the CDs from the Frantic Four reunion I do hear nostalgia. It's not about the songs themselves, it's about how you play them. When the FF reunited they listened (!!!!!) to the 77 Live album before playing. That's nostalgia. Whereas CQ have adapted the FF songs, at least the ones they've been playing over the years, to their own playing style, hence they are not being nostalgic. It doesn't sound like it used to in the 70s. The Frantic Four sounded like Status Quo because they are, CQ don't because they are not.!!
|
|
|
Post by americanquo on Jan 27, 2016 3:37:21 GMT
I've got no axe to grind here. I approached this band with no knowledge whatsoever, and didn't even know there had been a lineup change for the first few weeks. In my eyes, 'Hello' had the same weight as 'Thirsty Work'. It wasn't until I became familiar enough with the music to make my own judgments that I started coming to conclusions. Remember, I LIKE a lot of the later work. I think they should play mostly later work on stage, with a few oldies thrown in. That would be playing your own material, and there's more than enough to fill a great setlist. Yet, they do not do it. Why not? The standard answer is they are giving the fans what they want, and yet, they really aren't. If the fans want to hear the old songs, then the fans would prefer to hear them by the people who wrote, influenced, recorded and produced them. That's giving the people what they want, if the people want the oldies, and according to Quo's current management, they do. They are talking out of both sides of their mouths. Anyway, I love the band and love a lot of the later material. I can understand your point of view. I would like them to play more recent stuff. It's just that when I listen to the Bula Quo Live World Tour double CD I don't hear a band doing nostalgia, and when I listen to the CDs from the Frantic Four reunion I do hear nostalgia. It's not about the songs themselves, it's about how you play them. When the FF reunited they listened (!!!!!) to the 77 Live album before playing. That's nostalgia. Whereas CQ have adapted the FF songs, at least the ones they've been playing over the years, to their own playing style, hence they are not being nostalgic. It doesn't sound like it used to in the 70s. That's a fair answer, and does make some sense. I guess I just prefer the originals to the current versions. But it still brings up the issue of why they have to reach back 35-50 years for a setlist, when they have a massive backlist for the past 35 years.
|
|
|
Post by lazypokerblues on Jan 27, 2016 9:08:17 GMT
I disagree strongly, and I've laid down a lot of that on the old MB, but if you want to hear me say it again, go ahead. I've got no axe to grind here. I approached this band with no knowledge whatsoever, and didn't even know there had been a lineup change for the first few weeks. In my eyes, 'Hello' had the same weight as 'Thirsty Work'. It wasn't until I became familiar enough with the music to make my own judgments that I started coming to conclusions. Remember, I LIKE a lot of the later work. I think they should play mostly later work on stage, with a few oldies thrown in. That would be playing your own material, and there's more than enough to fill a great setlist. Yet, they do not do it. Why not? The standard answer is they are giving the fans what they want, and yet, they really aren't. If the fans want to hear the old songs, then the fans would prefer to hear them by the people who wrote, influenced, recorded and produced them. That's giving the people what they want, if the people want the oldies, and according to Quo's current management, they do. They are talking out of both sides of their mouths. Anyway, I love the band and love a lot of the later material. AQ - it's wonderful having you here because you approach discussion with fresh eyes and an objective point of view.
There is one vital ingredient missing from this discussion, and that is Quo's audience. You won't have had any experience of this so you can't take it into account, but I think it plays a really important part of why the setlist is what it is.
They never played very much with the set list - they never have. They've let it slowly evolve - some stuff stays in forever and becomes a 'must' play and other stuff comes and goes. Just look at the setlist from the mid 70s to the mid 80s. Their most creative time was in the 90s/00's. But in the 10's it's just become set in stone.
From the mid 90s onwards their audience started changing. I put this down to a combination of the old Quo army just gradually drifting away, year on year, also the band started doing cover versions, and became more easy listening, good time Christmas party knees up entertainers. The new audience wouldn't be interested in buying Quo's new albums - they just wanted to hear the greatest hits. You still had a minority of hardcore Quo Army hangers on, but in the main, in order to keep selling tickets, they've had to rely on just playing the big hits and doing medleys.
They've been playing 'new' stuff like Oriental and Creepin Up, for 14 years now, so they've become as well known as Caroline etc for the regular casual punter, even if they've never heard the Heavy Traffic album.
They tried playing Blue Eyed Lady and Oh Baby in 2014 and they went down like a lead balloon so that just shows the difference in the audience.
|
|
|
Post by frozenhero on Jan 27, 2016 9:58:21 GMT
So nostalgia is playing the songs like they were recorded,and how they got loved, but to adapt an old song and transform it to the recent style: playing it sloppy and uninspired, is not nostalgia? Then they are not nostalgic, but unaware of, and disrespectful to their own legacy. IMO. Etc. Etc. I think there was a lot of sloppiness during the FF reunions as well (overlooked by fans with nostalgia glasses, obviously), but that's well beyond what I said; I was referring to concerts like Just Doin' It and Pictures Live, which are overall good showcases of tight, energetic live versions of Status Quo songs seamlessly blended together to a modern, non-nostalgic, in-the-moment, heads-down rock concert. I'm referring to the fact that Rhino and Andy have adapted the songs to their playing style, so when I hear the 2006 live version of "Down Down" it's not inferior to the original version, it's simply different - it kicks major ass in both instances. It is however miles better than what I see on either FF reunion DVD, and I'm simply being an objective critic there, they couldn't do that particular song justice anymore. The problem as I see it is that people seem to fool themselves into thinking that the FF reunion was as good as the band once was in the 70s, and it simply wasn't, end of discussion. As long as songs are being developed, changed, updated, whatever, it's not nostalgia. When you go and listen to an old live recording and limit yourself to a certain time period despite all four band members having written and recorded loads of songs after that point, it is nostalgia, because it is trying to recreate something that happened years ago. Simply playing songs the way you are playing them by nature isn't. I don't know how you got the idea that my post was somehow defending Francis' lazy guitar playing. I mean, listen to how he sang GoGoGo on the Bula Quo tour. It's a new song and he couldn't or wouldn't do better than that. So where's the nostalgia connection?
|
|
|
Post by colmfoley on Jan 27, 2016 12:58:52 GMT
So nostalgia is playing the songs like they were recorded,and how they got loved, but to adapt an old song and transform it to the recent style: playing it sloppy and uninspired, is not nostalgia? Then they are not nostalgic, but unaware of, and disrespectful to their own legacy. IMO. Etc. Etc. I think there was a lot of sloppiness during the FF reunions as well (overlooked by fans with nostalgia glasses, obviously), but that's well beyond what I said; I was referring to concerts like Just Doin' It and Pictures Live, which are overall good showcases of tight, energetic live versions of Status Quo songs seamlessly blended together to a modern, non-nostalgic, in-the-moment, heads-down rock concert. I'm referring to the fact that Rhino and Andy have adapted the songs to their playing style, so when I hear the 2006 live version of "Down Down" it's not inferior to the original version, it's simply different - it kicks major ass in both instances. It is however miles better than what I see on either FF reunion DVD, and I'm simply being an objective critic there, they couldn't do that particular song justice anymore. The problem as I see it is that people seem to fool themselves into thinking that the FF reunion was as good as the band once was in the 70s, and it simply wasn't, end of discussion. As long as songs are being developed, changed, updated, whatever, it's not nostalgia. When you go and listen to an old live recording and limit yourself to a certain time period despite all four band members having written and recorded loads of songs after that point, it is nostalgia, because it is trying to recreate something that happened years ago. Simply playing songs the way you are playing them by nature isn't. I don't know how you got the idea that my post was somehow defending Francis' lazy guitar playing. I mean, listen to how he sang GoGoGo on the Bula Quo tour. It's a new song and he couldn't or wouldn't do better than that. So where's the nostalgia connection? They could have played some of the their hits (and quo ff had the greatest hits of Quo) on the reunion tour, though I suspect Rossi cleverly or otherwise decided to stay as far away from them as possible, in attempt to portrait the band with Alan and John in it, as some nostalgic 70's rock act who don't play hit singles..!!!
The reunion gigs sounded as good if not better than the 70's and of course they weren't as frantic as they once were, though watch Rick on Big Fat Mama live from Dublin it's about as frantic as it gets...the only sloppiness I saw on the tour was the toilets in hammersmith, which is to be expected at a proper Rock gig.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2016 13:04:12 GMT
So nostalgia is playing the songs like they were recorded,and how they got loved, but to adapt an old song and transform it to the recent style: playing it sloppy and uninspired, is not nostalgia? Then they are not nostalgic, but unaware of, and disrespectful to their own legacy. IMO. Etc. Etc. I think there was a lot of sloppiness during the FF reunions as well (overlooked by fans with nostalgia glasses, obviously), but that's well beyond what I said; I was referring to concerts like Just Doin' It and Pictures Live, which are overall good showcases of tight, energetic live versions of Status Quo songs seamlessly blended together to a modern, non-nostalgic, in-the-moment, heads-down rock concert. I'm referring to the fact that Rhino and Andy have adapted the songs to their playing style, so when I hear the 2006 live version of "Down Down" it's not inferior to the original version, it's simply different - it kicks major ass in both instances. It is however miles better than what I see on either FF reunion DVD, and I'm simply being an objective critic there, they couldn't do that particular song justice anymore. The problem as I see it is that people seem to fool themselves into thinking that the FF reunion was as good as the band once was in the 70s, and it simply wasn't, end of discussion. As long as songs are being developed, changed, updated, whatever, it's not nostalgia. When you go and listen to an old live recording and limit yourself to a certain time period despite all four band members having written and recorded loads of songs after that point, it is nostalgia, because it is trying to recreate something that happened years ago. Simply playing songs the way you are playing them by nature isn't. I don't know how you got the idea that my post was somehow defending Francis' lazy guitar playing. I mean, listen to how he sang GoGoGo on the Bula Quo tour. It's a new song and he couldn't or wouldn't do better than that. So where's the nostalgia connection? Lets put it this way. I would much rather see the original members try to recreate and indulge in their own nostalgia (if that is what it is) rather than have persistently updated recreations of those songs with half of the original membership missing.
It matters less to me whether the originals play 'Down Down' or whatever other hit or song of theirs less well by comparison to 30 and 40 more years back - I would much rather have this than an updated, over polished and over rehearsed version by a 'modern day' band who prefer to copy original hits and refuse to play their own product beyond CUOY and the Oriental and a rotation of two or three other over rehearsed interchangeable standards as a bolt on mainstay of the set.
The remaining mostly 95% + ignored CQ product, when it comes to the live show, has obvious departures around a theme to the FF original product and would be a different experience to any FF gig past or present.
But that is mostly the point. It would nonetheless be an authentic reproduction of their own sound, and authentic gig in its own right set aside from the FF, and, based on a 30 yr back catalogue - it would be a recreation of CQ own nostalgia. That would turn it from an entertainment show (with added 'amusement value') into a music gig in its own right. Aside from Francis and Rick - Rhino, Andy and each drummer of CQ are and have been good musicians in their own right, so let them focus on what they bring to the table with Francis and Rick, rather than dumb all that down to happy clappy caricaturing and copying of old work that cannot be replicated as a whole even with half of the original parts still in place. In that sense, a major sense, its the original integrity of the music that matters, rather than any modern day polished replication to remove 'untidy edges'.
Placed in a position where the band and management do not care what large sections of the fans think, or prefer instead to insist on knowing better what those fans think than they do for themselves, and thereby refuse to reflect the true self identity of CQ at the expense of focussing on being a tribute band both to the FF and themselves, it does actually raise the question about the bandwith existence of the name of 'Status Quo'
Its the first time I have ever said that, but for the first time I've got to the position of actually thinking it. There, its been said.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2016 13:23:43 GMT
Andy Bown can claim his authenticity in the FF (+1) He played as part of the full experience and generation of FF song writing and success.
Nothing against Rhino here, and although I am a long standing fan, please excuse my lack of knowledge on this particular point, but how much music had he heard of the FF when he joined and which, if any songs did he know and like before the start of the new chapter?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2016 14:24:51 GMT
Some interesting points made here.
In my opinion, it can't be seen as nostalgia when the 'current' (30-year-old...) band play songs from Quo's own back catalogue. It's what they've got, it's their material, and every time they play it, it sounds a bit different, but nonetheless Quo just because of who they are today. They are approaching their music from today's point-of-view, with the musicians they are today. Nothing can recreate that sound of the early 70s. Revisiting those songs from Quo's golden era on every tour nowadays isn't nostalgia. It's the material they work with, and they use and mould it, so to say, according to how they feel and how they play together today. You can't replicate the past. The reunion gigs were amazing in as much as we had the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to see our original Quo again and maybe relive some scenes from our own past, have feelings of 'nostalgia', of things that might once have been. But did they, did we recreate our own past? It might have been a kind of nostalgic experience, but it couldn't and didn't recreate anything that was given up ages ago.
Why the 'current' band hesitate to play newer material is a mystery to many fans.
So is Status Quo a "nostalgia band"? Nostalgic in as far as constantly revisiting old material, yes. Nostalgic seen the way that they constantly reproduce their old songs, no. They interpret their old songs in a different way. So they do sound familiar, they might sound more polished, but they're still their old songs, only played by today's musicians.
And I think they're still quite up to it.
|
|