|
|
Post by dennis on Nov 1, 2017 1:26:17 GMT
The subject of Hardcore, these days it's not really important IMHO With Rick's passing you're either FRQ or JCQ? I'm not gonna slag FR off (much) but he's gone right downtown in my book, slagging off the FF Reunions with 'It's everyone's fault bar mine routine' is pi** poor. Always seen myself as 'Hardcore' tbh but I'm done with FRQ/CQ, it's run it's course, it's stale and predictable, seen them every tour since EOTR '84 but missing the 2017 one. Best Band ever? Without doubt, the FF Reunion Tours brought everything full circle, but it's gone now (without Rick it's FR and Friends) I never missed a Tour, bought EVERYTHING they ever released, spent £1,000's on 'em...no regrets whatsoever. Proud to be Quo hardcore though  I suppose and guess it’s easier for me. It’s been Francis and lackies for me since 1985. Hes called the shots and led the direction. So for me line ups come and go and it makes no difference. They haven’t been a great band since at least 81. Thats a long time ago. What amazes me is it’s taken so long for others to see Francis for who he is. Im not part of the hardcore as the band I love is long gone. Likewise - it's always amazed me that the post Live Aid line-ups have managed to keep going all this time. I really expected the inevitable reunion to happen much much sooner, out of necessity. |
|
|
|
Post by curiousgirl on Nov 1, 2017 10:06:25 GMT
I suppose and guess it’s easier for me. It’s been Francis and lackies for me since 1985. Hes called the shots and led the direction. So for me line ups come and go and it makes no difference. They haven’t been a great band since at least 81. Thats a long time ago. What amazes me is it’s taken so long for others to see Francis for who he is. Im not part of the hardcore as the band I love is long gone. Likewise - it's always amazed me that the post Live Aid line-ups have managed to keep going all this time. I really expected the inevitable reunion to happen much much sooner, out of necessity. I agree with you Dennis because I didn't go to see them post 84. And I was put off by the new look posters of the 86 line-up. Having seen youtube clips of gigs up to the mid 90s, I was surprised by how energetic and heavy rock they still were, despite the commercial/singles image. I probably would have even enjoyed them - with my eyes closed  . I suspect this is why they lasted so long, particularly as money is made from touring from the 90s onwards and not albums. And thinking about the albums, and if they had to only rely on those sales to keep going, then they may well have sunk sooner. But once the money shifted from record sales to touring, they were able to keep the band afloat. |
|
|
|
Post by dennis on Nov 1, 2017 10:54:36 GMT
Likewise - it's always amazed me that the post Live Aid line-ups have managed to keep going all this time. I really expected the inevitable reunion to happen much much sooner, out of necessity. I agree with you Dennis because I didn't go to see them post 84. And I was put off by the new look posters of the 86 line-up. Having seen youtube clips of gigs up to the mid 90s, I was surprised by how energetic and heavy rock they still were, despite the commercial/singles image. I probably would have even enjoyed them - with my eyes closed . I suspect this is why they lasted so long, particularly as money is made from touring from the 90s onwards and not albums. And thinking about the albums, and if they had to only rely on those sales to keep going, then they may well have sunk sooner. But once the money shifted from record sales to touring, they were able to keep the band afloat. I did attend one gig in '86 but, to me, it just didn't sound quite like Quo any more & none of the clips I've seen of subsequent performances have felt right to me - they'd somehow lost that Quo groove, imo. I also found the disparity between the band on record & in concert increasingly incongruous. If they believed in their recorded output, why didn't the set steadily evolve instead of remaining firmly dominated by '70s output? They were now a pop-rock band on record & a Quo tribute band in concert. Thank goodness we had the reunions! |
|
|
|
Post by curiousgirl on Nov 1, 2017 11:22:59 GMT
I agree with you Dennis because I didn't go to see them post 84. And I was put off by the new look posters of the 86 line-up. Having seen youtube clips of gigs up to the mid 90s, I was surprised by how energetic and heavy rock they still were, despite the commercial/singles image. I probably would have even enjoyed them - with my eyes closed . I suspect this is why they lasted so long, particularly as money is made from touring from the 90s onwards and not albums. And thinking about the albums, and if they had to only rely on those sales to keep going, then they may well have sunk sooner. But once the money shifted from record sales to touring, they were able to keep the band afloat. I did attend one gig in '86 but, to me, it just didn't sound quite like Quo any more & none of the clips I've seen of subsequent performances have felt right to me - they'd somehow lost that Quo groove, imo. I also found the disparity between the band on record & in concert increasingly incongruous. If they believed in their recorded output, why didn't the set steadily evolve instead of remaining firmly dominated by '70s output? They were now a pop-rock band on record & a Quo tribute band in concert. Thank goodness we had the reunions! That's really interesting. And on reflection, as we're pretty much aligned on the Quo sound, I'm sure I would have felt the same if I'd gone. Well they must have found a new set of fans with some cross-over ones then. Yes indeed, that goodness for the reunions. |
|
. I suspect this is why they lasted so long, particularly as money is made from touring from the 90s onwards and not albums. And thinking about the albums, and if they had to only rely on those sales to keep going, then they may well have sunk sooner. But once the money shifted from record sales to touring, they were able to keep the band afloat.